Dear Matt,

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston10

> I researched for about 4 hours yesterday and I couldn't find any
> evidence of a war in the 1590s.

> I did find a mid 1610's war where Micmac war parties came down
> after the Tarateen war while the Pequot's attacked Eastern
> Connecticut. Then disease struck and killed possibly 80% of the
> Wampanoag population, although the Narraganasett remained
> relatively unscathed and emerged as the more powerful of the two.

Thanks for tracking that information down. So the crisis war for the
Wampanoag before King Philips' war occurred in the mid 1610s, which
actually makes a lot of sense.

It would be really neat if we had some record of the Wampanoag wars
prior to 1600, but that information doesn't seem to exist, though we
have the colonists records starting from the 1600s.

If you're going to develop a crisis war timeline, try to see if you
can discern the individual turnings between wars as well. If there's
any kind of social history, you can usually find the awakening by
looking for generation gaps or gender conflicts. Sometimes you can
find the climax of the awakening as an event that establishes a
victory by either the aging Hero or young Prophet generation --
examples are Nixon's resignation and the Tiananment Square massacre.
And the ending years of the Unraveling era can sometimes be
identified by a craziness, including a financial bubble.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

What does the "J." stand for? It'd be rad if your middle name was also John, John John. :wink:

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I have a 20 year old son who's going to
be pulled into the vortex of it all, as will Matt and many of the
Millies on this web.

C'est la vie. Que sera sera. Shit happens. I'm not sure it's something to get your knickers in a bunch over. We're all going to die. Down the road from my old house a young active man was cut down by an elderly driver and dragged for a mile under her car until she finally realized she hit something. She died the next day of a heart attack after learning she had killed that man. And this was on a spring day in peaceful, very Third Turning 1997. What can you do? Nothing.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The reason that I don't answer your questions is because they've been
discussed many times before as you well know, and because you often
festoon your questions with gratuitous personal attacks.

How does it feel? Hypocrisy is a nasty thing.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

If I were a woman I could get a restraining order and maybe even have you arrested for stalking.

Huh? By asking to have questions actually answered? To ask that you not talk down to everyone? What is up with you?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

In my 20 .... errr 21 years online -- you see, Sean, I've been online since 1984 -- I've discovered that there are certain types of people whose obsessions are not good to feed.

And you think that saying you are "insufferably pompous" is a hysterical ranting on my part and that you feel insulted by my saying so? Dude, read what you write.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

For example, you're well aware of the answer to your question about
the Puritan Flip since you were involved in the original discussion,
and you also know you could go to my book on my web site and read
about it there.

I made up the name "Puritan Flip," but all the details of what
happened are from William McLoughlin's 1978 book, Revivals,
Awakenings, and Reform. So it's McLoughlin's Puritan Flip, not
mine. Strauss and Howe have repeatedly identified this book as the
highest authority on the Puritan Awakening, but McLoughlin clearly
and unambiguously says that the Puritan Awakening began around 1604,
with the ascendancy of King James VI to the throne, while Strauss and
Howe have it beginning in 1621, which is considerably later.

So what's the resolution to this inconsistency in Strauss and Howe's
work? McLoughlin provides the answer to that too. He explains how
the Puritan Awakening was a Puritan revolt against the Anglican Church
in the 1600s decade, but it turned into a revolt against Puritanism
when the Pilgrims reached America. That's the Puritan Flip.

Uh, S&H indeed cite McLoughlin as an authority, but obviously disagree with him on dates since they tellingly don't mention the decades of the Puritan Awakening in the paragraph that mentions him [p. 47], wheras a few sentences down they do mention them for other awakenings.

Furthermore, it's been a long time (apx. 11 years) since I've read his Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform, but didn't McLoughlin have the Puritan Awakening end c. 1640? It may have been 1630. I'm not sure. Regardless, that gives English society as little as two years, at most twelve, to go through a third turning before this alleged "Crisis War" begins. How do you explain that?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

As I said, I see one of my jobs as correcting the few inconsistencies in Strauss and Howe's brilliant work, so that it will be an academically valid discipline.

How very magnanimous of you. But you do far more than correct, or not, a "few inconsistencies". You almost completely alter what they define as the function of second and fourth turnings, as I have described in previous posts but you never answer. Are you afraid to? What gives?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

So, McLoughlin's Puritan flip may be a "hell of a stretch" to you,
but your opinion doesn't particularly count for much. McLoughlin's
opinion counts, and he lays it out in unambiguous detail.

How do I know all this? Because I actually went to the trouble to
read McLoughlin's book!!! I don't just throw out any nonsense that
goes through my head; I actually went to the trouble to research
something before posting it.

You too can do research before asking a question, just like me. Why
don't you read McLoughlin's book to see for yourself, and then post
something intelligent for a change? But I'm sure you won't bother,
because you're more into obsession and stalking.

I wrote a (30+ page) pre-thesis in my graduate program on the Great Awakening and became intimate with McLoughlin's ideas, thank you. But you can arrogantly assume that you are the only one that reads him if it makes you feel better.

And yes, even after knowing what McLoughlin said it still stands that this "flip" of yours explaining the ECW as a 4T is one hell of a stretch.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Could I make a suggestion? You're about to become a new father, and
I know you're very depressed, but you've got to pull yourself
together because your wife and your soon-to-arrive child are going to
need you very much. I'm not the most important person in your life;
they are.

Talk about insulting; and talk (once again) about being pompous. "Very depressed"? First, what does that have to do with not answering my questions? Second, I am not depressed. But while we're playing amateur pyschologist . . . could you be engaging in transference? :wink:

Oh, and you are not the most important person in my life. Hopeful Cynic is. :lol:

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Let me tell you something about myself. I have a very tough time
making it through the day too, though I make a point of not taking it
out on other people. And a lot of people don't realize that I
actually believe the stuff that's on my web site, but I do, and at
least once or twice a day I get completely overwhelmed by the sadness
of it all, especially since I have a 20 year old son who's going to
be pulled into the vortex of it all, as will Matt and many of the
Millies on this web. Maybe the fact that your child is going to grow
up in that environment is one of the things that's depressing you, as
well it might. But can you begin to understand why, with all that
going on, I really don't want to put up with your anger and hostility
and personal attack crap, and why I really don't care whether your
questions get answered or not? There's just too much else on my
plate.

All very nice. Now, I will recap the questions on the table for your convenience so as to make it easier for you (at end of this post). This discussion is open for all to see. If you are truly honest about this being a thread on "objections" to GD, and that you are academically capable of answering the questions, then I look forward to your answers.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

By the way, when's your baby due?

Halloween. Thank you for your concern.

Questions for Generational Dynamics

#1

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The fact that WW I and WW II were only 20 years apart was the biggest
problem, but other problems became apparent to anyone who drilled
down into the details.

Why is this a problem? WWII occurred during a period of fundamental institutional change. WWI solved little in terms of that. One is a 4T war and the other is not.

#2

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

People criticize me for "leaving S&H behind," but that's completely untrue.

So dispensing with their definition of a fourth turning (to a Crisis War only),adding a fifth turning and fifth archetype to their decidedly four-stroke mechanism, radically simplifying their intergenerational dynamics, and radically changing the dates they identified for turnings and generations (including switching 2T's to 4T's and much more) is not leaving S&H behind?!?!? How is it not?

#3

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I've resolved numerous anomalies, including the Great Depression anomaly, the WW I anomaly,

What anomalies?

#4

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

the date contradiction in the Puritan Awakening,

No contradiction. You don't have to move it to somehow remove the English Civil War from it. The ECW was not a 4T war by S&H's definition because it was suffused with "inner-world" cultural turmoil and ultimately solved nothing in the institutional order. By 1660 England was back to having a monarch with Papist inclinations who adored the Divine Right concept and a Parliament very nervous about those qualities. The change came in the Glorious Revolution. What's the problem?

The problem is you don't recognize a fundamental component of S&H's theory which defines what the turnings actually are. To you, all great wars must be Crisis Wars. That's NOT S&H's definition and entirely changes the theory. You have indeed left S&H behind. That may be fine, but to say you are building upon them is factually not correct. If I am wrong, please show me how.

#5

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

and the contradiction in the 30-year "Glorious crisis", which
supposedly has no war, and yet begins in 1675 with the bloodiest war
in North American history, and ends in 1704 in the middle of the
bloodiest war in 18th century Europe.

It started in 1675, in America. It looks like it started later in England. For England, it is likely that the War for Spanish Succession was a 4T war for England and all Western Europe. I don't see the contradiciton. Where is it?

#6

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Thus, the Rebels and Yanks who fought in the Civil War were, by definition, Heroes.

This exemplifies the problem with GD's connection to S&H. They were not "by definition" of the Hero archetype. That archetype requires more than just fighting in a big war -- there's several other components to it, like the type of upbringing, institutional problems, how they are perceived by the other archetypes, and so on. By simplying 4T's to Crisis Wars and centering your theory entirely on Crisis Wars you warp S&H's theory out of all recognition. Is this not so? If not, how?

#7

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

That the American Civil War was a 5T war can be found by recomputing
the dates. The Revolutionary war ended in 1782 . . .

In S&H's definition of a 4T, that crisis continued for several years because of the continuation of serious institutional upheaval and reconstruction. There was a nasty depression and a severe constitutional crisis in the 1780's. And the stability of the new constitutional order was questionable until the successful conclusion of the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794. How do you have the 4T end in 1782?

Furthermore, serious, comprehensive religious ferver did not break out until the early 1820's. The items McLoughlin identifies for the very, very 19th century mostly occurred in the hinterlands and were not as broad and deep as what came decades later.

You're reworking to create a "fifth turning" does not fit S&H's basic ideas at all. Is that now evident?

#8

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The optional "Fifth Turning" is a new proposed modification to
Strauss and Howe's theory. Something was needed anyway, because
S&H's theory calls for three 20-year era's between crisis periods,
and most of the six cycles they considered violated their own theory.
The 5T concept is an elegant addition to the theory, and may resolve
a whole collection of contradictions and questions in the original
TFT.

Far more in line with their theory, not to mention far more parsimonious and therefore approved by Mr. Ockham, would just to say that turnings and generations took longer prior to the late modern era due to a later age of net social autonomy. The Civil War anomaly was just a problem with the adjustment from one length to another. No more really necessary. What is your view in light of this?

Also, Mike Alexander has proposed interesting ideas that also discount some basic tenets of S&H's theory but he admits to doing so, and also still keeps pretty true to their dates. Are you now willing to agree that you are actually not in line with S&H?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The reason that I don't answer your questions is because they've been
discussed many times before as you well know, and because you often
festoon your questions with gratuitous personal attacks.

How does it feel? Hypocrisy is a nasty thing.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

If I were a woman I could get a restraining order and maybe even have you arrested for stalking.

Huh? By asking to have questions actually answered? To ask that you not talk down to everyone? What is up with you?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

In my 20 .... errr 21 years online -- you see, Sean, I've been online since 1984 -- I've discovered that there are certain types of people whose obsessions are not good to feed.

And you think that saying you are "insufferably pompous" is a hysterical ranting on my part and that you feel insulted by my saying so? Dude, read what you write.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

For example, you're well aware of the answer to your question about
the Puritan Flip since you were involved in the original discussion,
and you also know you could go to my book on my web site and read
about it there.

I made up the name "Puritan Flip," but all the details of what
happened are from William McLoughlin's 1978 book, Revivals,
Awakenings, and Reform. So it's McLoughlin's Puritan Flip, not
mine. Strauss and Howe have repeatedly identified this book as the
highest authority on the Puritan Awakening, but McLoughlin clearly
and unambiguously says that the Puritan Awakening began around 1604,
with the ascendancy of King James VI to the throne, while Strauss and
Howe have it beginning in 1621, which is considerably later.

So what's the resolution to this inconsistency in Strauss and Howe's
work? McLoughlin provides the answer to that too. He explains how
the Puritan Awakening was a Puritan revolt against the Anglican Church
in the 1600s decade, but it turned into a revolt against Puritanism
when the Pilgrims reached America. That's the Puritan Flip.

Uh, S&H indeed cite McLoughlin as an authority, but obviously disagree with him on dates since they tellingly don't mention the decades of the Puritan Awakening in the paragraph that mentions him [p. 47], wheras a few sentences down they do mention them for other awakenings.

Furthermore, it's been a long time (apx. 11 years) since I've read his Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform, but didn't McLoughlin have the Puritan Awakening end c. 1640? It may have been 1630. I'm not sure. Regardless, that gives English society as little as two years, at most twelve, to go through a third turning before this alleged "Crisis War" begins. How do you explain that?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

As I said, I see one of my jobs as correcting the few inconsistencies in Strauss and Howe's brilliant work, so that it will be an academically valid discipline.

How very magnanimous of you. But you do far more than correct, or not, a "few inconsistencies". You almost completely alter what they define as the function of second and fourth turnings, as I have described in previous posts but you never answer. Are you afraid to? What gives?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

So, McLoughlin's Puritan flip may be a "hell of a stretch" to you,
but your opinion doesn't particularly count for much. McLoughlin's
opinion counts, and he lays it out in unambiguous detail.

How do I know all this? Because I actually went to the trouble to
read McLoughlin's book!!! I don't just throw out any nonsense that
goes through my head; I actually went to the trouble to research
something before posting it.

You too can do research before asking a question, just like me. Why
don't you read McLoughlin's book to see for yourself, and then post
something intelligent for a change? But I'm sure you won't bother,
because you're more into obsession and stalking.

I wrote a (30+ page) pre-thesis in my graduate program on the Great Awakening and became intimate with McLoughlin's ideas, thank you. But you can arrogantly assume that you are the only one that reads him if it makes you feel better.

And yes, even after knowing what McLoughlin said it still stands that this "flip" of yours explaining the ECW as a 4T is one hell of a stretch.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Could I make a suggestion? You're about to become a new father, and
I know you're very depressed, but you've got to pull yourself
together because your wife and your soon-to-arrive child are going to
need you very much. I'm not the most important person in your life;
they are.

Talk about insulting; and talk (once again) about being pompous. "Very depressed"? First, what does that have to do with not answering my questions? Second, I am not depressed. But while we're playing amateur pyschologist . . . could you be engaging in transference? :wink:

Oh, and you are not the most important person in my life. Hopeful Cynic is. :lol:

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Let me tell you something about myself. I have a very tough time
making it through the day too, though I make a point of not taking it
out on other people. And a lot of people don't realize that I
actually believe the stuff that's on my web site, but I do, and at
least once or twice a day I get completely overwhelmed by the sadness
of it all, especially since I have a 20 year old son who's going to
be pulled into the vortex of it all, as will Matt and many of the
Millies on this web. Maybe the fact that your child is going to grow
up in that environment is one of the things that's depressing you, as
well it might. But can you begin to understand why, with all that
going on, I really don't want to put up with your anger and hostility
and personal attack crap, and why I really don't care whether your
questions get answered or not? There's just too much else on my
plate.

All very nice. Now, I will recap the questions on the table for your convenience so as to make it easier for you (at end of this post). This discussion is open for all to see. If you are truly honest about this being a thread on "objections" to GD, and that you are academically capable of answering the questions, then I look forward to your answers.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

By the way, when's your baby due?

Halloween. Thank you for your concern.

Questions for Generational Dynamics

#1

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The fact that WW I and WW II were only 20 years apart was the biggest
problem, but other problems became apparent to anyone who drilled
down into the details.

Why is this a problem? WWII occurred during a period of fundamental institutional change. WWI solved little in terms of that. One is a 4T war and the other is not.

#2

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

People criticize me for "leaving S&H behind," but that's completely untrue.

So dispensing with their definition of a fourth turning (to a Crisis War only),adding a fifth turning and fifth archetype to their decidedly four-stroke mechanism, radically simplifying their intergenerational dynamics, and radically changing the dates they identified for turnings and generations (including switching 2T's to 4T's and much more) is not leaving S&H behind?!?!? How is it not?

#3

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I've resolved numerous anomalies, including the Great Depression anomaly, the WW I anomaly,

What anomalies?

#4

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

the date contradiction in the Puritan Awakening,

No contradiction. You don't have to move it to somehow remove the English Civil War from it. The ECW was not a 4T war by S&H's definition because it was suffused with "inner-world" cultural turmoil and ultimately solved nothing in the institutional order. By 1660 England was back to having a monarch with Papist inclinations who adored the Divine Right concept and a Parliament very nervous about those qualities. The change came in the Glorious Revolution. What's the problem?

The problem is you don't recognize a fundamental component of S&H's theory which defines what the turnings actually are. To you, all great wars must be Crisis Wars. That's NOT S&H's definition and entirely changes the theory. You have indeed left S&H behind. That may be fine, but to say you are building upon them is factually not correct. If I am wrong, please show me how.

#5

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

and the contradiction in the 30-year "Glorious crisis", which
supposedly has no war, and yet begins in 1675 with the bloodiest war
in North American history, and ends in 1704 in the middle of the
bloodiest war in 18th century Europe.

It started in 1675, in America. It looks like it started later in England. For England, it is likely that the War for Spanish Succession was a 4T war for England and all Western Europe. I don't see the contradiciton. Where is it?

#6

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Thus, the Rebels and Yanks who fought in the Civil War were, by definition, Heroes.

This exemplifies the problem with GD's connection to S&H. They were not "by definition" of the Hero archetype. That archetype requires more than just fighting in a big war -- there's several other components to it, like the type of upbringing, institutional problems, how they are perceived by the other archetypes, and so on. By simplying 4T's to Crisis Wars and centering your theory entirely on Crisis Wars you warp S&H's theory out of all recognition. Is this not so? If not, how?

#7

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

That the American Civil War was a 5T war can be found by recomputing
the dates. The Revolutionary war ended in 1782 . . .

In S&H's definition of a 4T, that crisis continued for several years because of the continuation of serious institutional upheaval and reconstruction. There was a nasty depression and a severe constitutional crisis in the 1780's. And the stability of the new constitutional order was questionable until the successful conclusion of the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794. How do you have the 4T end in 1782?

Furthermore, serious, comprehensive religious ferver did not break out until the early 1820's. The items McLoughlin identifies for the very, very 19th century mostly occurred in the hinterlands and were not as broad and deep as what came decades later.

You're reworking to create a "fifth turning" does not fit S&H's basic ideas at all. Is that now evident?

#8

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The optional "Fifth Turning" is a new proposed modification to
Strauss and Howe's theory. Something was needed anyway, because
S&H's theory calls for three 20-year era's between crisis periods,
and most of the six cycles they considered violated their own theory.
The 5T concept is an elegant addition to the theory, and may resolve
a whole collection of contradictions and questions in the original
TFT.

Far more in line with their theory, not to mention far more parsimonious and therefore approved by Mr. Ockham, would just to say that turnings and generations took longer prior to the late modern era due to a later age of net social autonomy. The Civil War anomaly was just a problem with the adjustment from one length to another. No more really necessary. What is your view in light of this?

Also, Mike Alexander has proposed interesting ideas that also discount some basic tenets of S&H's theory but he admits to doing so, and also still keeps pretty true to their dates. Are you now willing to agree that you are actually not in line with S&H?

Perhaps time has just been intelligently designed, Sean. There's your answer.

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I have a 20 year old son who's going to
be pulled into the vortex of it all, as will Matt and many of the
Millies on this web.

C'est la vie. Que sera sera. Shit happens. I'm not sure it's something to get your knickers in a bunch over. We're all going to die. Down the road from my old house a young active man was cut down by an elderly driver and dragged for a mile under her car until she finally realized she hit something. She died the next day of a heart attack after learning she had killed that man. And this was on a spring day in peaceful, very Third Turning 1997. What can you do? Nothing.

Well, yes, anyone can resign at any time and obsequiously ask: "What can anyone do about it?" I'm going with John on this one because I simply do not see a bright future, or at least not a bright financial future, for those Americans who have not yet arisen to adulthood. They are going to see some hard times (as most of us here on T4T like to think). They are going to have to pay our debts, not to mention their own (and also not to mention the staggering interest owed to the Chinese). They are going to hate us for being so goddamn stupid. There will be a vortex, and it won't be kind.

--Croakmore

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Thanks for tracking that information down. So the crisis war for the Wampanoag before King Philips' war occurred in the mid 1610s, which actually makes a lot of sense.

No problem.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

It would be really neat if we had some record of the Wampanoag wars prior to 1600, but that information doesn't seem to exist, though we have the colonists records starting from the 1600s.

I looked on the internet, encyclopedia, and at a few books, and there doesn't seem to be any information. I'm going to move onto something else. I'll post my findings on here when I am done.

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

Perhaps time has just been intelligently designed, Sean. There's your answer.

Maybe. :wink:

But I hope to get a better answer than that.

Can anyone explain what the following article means? What are
polymorphisms in birds?

How does he reach the conclusion that, "The European sequences also
indicate the H5N1 will be migrating to Europe this season due to the
widespread infections of H5N1 waterfowl in Russia, Mongolia, and
Kazakhstan"????

Can anyone help me make sense of this?

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com



http://www.recombinomics.com/News/09...ts_Europe.html

Commentary

Novosibirsk H5N1 Wild Bird Flu Recombinants from Europe

Recombinomics Commentary
September 30, 2005

Five partial HA sequences from the summer outbreak of H5N1 wild bird
flu were deposited at GenBank. Included was a sequence from a health
great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus),
A/grebe/Novosibirsk/29/05(H5N1), a sick domestic duck,
A/duck/Novosibirsk/56/05(H5N1), and three dead chickens
(A/chicken/Novosibirsk/64/05(H5N1), A/chicken/Novosibirsk/65/05(H5N1),
A/chicken/Novosibirsk/66/05(H5N1)). All five sequences were very
similar to each other and the sixteen H5N1 wild bird isolates from
dead waterfowl at Qinghai Lake. The deposited sequences cover the
highly pathogenic HA cleavage site and all sequences in this area were
identical.

The highly pathogenic sequence in the healthy great crested grebe
demonstrates that highly pathogenic H5N1 is present in asymptomatic
wild waterfowl. This is similar to the asymptomatic waterfowl in
Vietnam, which harbor high concentrations of highly pathogenic virus
that is lethal to humans and chickens, yet produces mild or no ill
effects in the waterfowl.

The ability of these wild birds to transport H5N1 over long distances
was also support by sequence analysis. Two the polymorphism found in
all five Novosibirsk H5N1 isolates, C934T and T940C were not found in
other H5N1 isolates, including the H5N1 isolates from Qinghai lake.
Instead, the polymorphisms were restricted to H5N2 sequences isolated
in chickens and guinea fowl in Italy in 1997 and 1998. The
polymorphisms were acquired by recombination, just as the PB2
polymorphisms in the Qinghai lake isolates were acquired from European
swine.

The acquisition of these polymorphisms is cited because each
acquisition involves more than one polymorphism in a small area.
However many of the polymorphism in the wild bird sequences are from
Europe, even though the H5N1 sequences, including the highly
pathogenic HA cleavage site, and the 20 amino acid deletion of NA are
exclusively found in Asia.

The recombinant sequences from Europe provide more evidence showing
that the polymorphism are carried by wild birds. Dual infections by
flu from Europe and flu from Asia lead to these recombinants with
mixtures of polymorphisms. The European sequences also indicate the
H5N1 will be migrating to Europe this season due to the widespread
infections of H5N1 waterfowl in Russia, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan.

These birds are now migrating to warmer climates, and transporting
highly pathogenic H5N1 into areas where it has not previously been
repotted.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Can anyone explain what the following article means? What are
polymorphisms in birds?

Perhaps they mean this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_...e_polymorphism

What little I understand of both articles suggests to me that they're talking about the polymorphisms in the various strains of flu viruses, rather than in the birds.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

How does he reach the conclusion that, "The European sequences also
indicate the H5N1 will be migrating to Europe this season due to the
widespread infections of H5N1 waterfowl in Russia, Mongolia, and
Kazakhstan"???

It looks like he claims the data show that H5N1 has already demonstrated the ability to travel through disease vectors at great distances and speeds. So he expects it to get to Europe very soon.

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I have a 20 year old son who's going to
be pulled into the vortex of it all, as will Matt and many of the
Millies on this web.

C'est la vie. Que sera sera. Shit happens. I'm not sure it's something to get your knickers in a bunch over. We're all going to die. Down the road from my old house a young active man was cut down by an elderly driver and dragged for a mile under her car until she finally realized she hit something. She died the next day of a heart attack after learning she had killed that man. And this was on a spring day in peaceful, very Third Turning 1997. What can you do? Nothing.

Well, yes, anyone can resign at any time and obsequiously ask: "What can anyone do about it?" I'm going with John on this one because I simply do not see a bright future, or at least not a bright financial future, for those Americans who have not yet arisen to adulthood. They are going to see some hard times (as most of us here on T4T like to think). They are going to have to pay our debts, not to mention their own (and also not to mention the staggering interest owed to the Chinese). They are going to hate us for being so goddamn stupid. There will be a vortex, and it won't be kind.

--Croakmore

Oh no Croak the boomers will luxuriate until the end of their on the enforced generosity of my generation, as will the spoiled millenials. What assets we xers do not lose in the crash will be taxed at stalinist levels, as will our incomes, and the elected thieves in Washington will find some way to make it painful to repatriate assets we might have abroad as well, therefore discouraging the expatriation of our assets in the first place. No one cares about nomads, except our mommas (my boomer/silent cusper mother used to come chasing after me to school to give me my blazer or sweater if I forgot it, though I think that might have been primarily to embarrass me).

The smartest xers have already left this carnival of fools that passes for a country, and have no intention of returning.

Dear "Mr. 1979":

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

> What does the "J." stand for? It'd be rad if your middle name was
> also John, John John. Wink

My father's name was James John Xenakis. He wanted to name me after
himself, but didn't like to have to use "Jr." So my name is John
James Xenakis. Carrying on the tradition in a slightly different
way, my son's wonderful name is Jason James Xenakis.

What's your name?

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

> C'est la vie. Que sera sera. Shit happens. I'm not sure it's
> something to get your knickers in a bunch over. We're all going to
> die. Down the road from my old house a young active man was cut
> down by an elderly driver and dragged for a mile under her car
> until she finally realized she hit something. She died the next
> day of a heart attack after learning she had killed that man. And
> this was on a spring day in peaceful, very Third Turning 1997.
> What can you do? Nothing.

What I remember is the plane that exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland,
in 1987 (I think) during the middle of the night. Pieces of the
plane crashed into various houses, killing a few people. I started
thinking, if you're not safe in your own bed sleeping, then where are
you safe?

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

> "Your wife and your soon-to-arrive child are going to need you
> very much. I'm not the most important person in your life; they
> are." - John Xenakis, author of Generational Dynamics.

It's really great when you kids help each other out, and it's good of
you to keep reminding Sean of this. He needs to focus on what's
important.

Originally Posted by Mr. 1979

> Perhaps time has just been intelligently designed, Sean. There's
> your answer.

I don't understand this. What does that mean?

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Sean,

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> And you think that saying you are "insufferably pompous" is a
> hysterical ranting on my part and that you feel insulted by my
> saying so?

I'll answer the "off-topic" questions in the Flame War thread, and
the remaining ones here.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> Uh, S&H indeed cite McLoughlin as an authority, but obviously
> disagree with him on dates since they tellingly don't mention the
> decades of the Puritan Awakening in the paragraph that mentions
> him [p. 47], wheras a few sentences down they do mention them for
> other awakenings.

> Furthermore, it's been a long time (apx. 11 years) since I've read
> his Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform, but didn't McLoughlin have
> the Puritan Awakening end c. 1640? It may have been 1630. I'm not
> sure. Regardless, that gives English society as little as two
> years, at most twelve, to go through a third turning before this
> alleged "Crisis War" begins. How do you explain that?

Wow! This is a brand new revelation. I never heard this before.
Where did you get the information that S&H disagree with McLoughlin?

When he wrote me a personal message last years (which I posted in its
entirety in this thread), he said, "The entire era of 1620-40s has
been called the "Puritan Awakening" by many scholars before us
(McLoughlin, e.g., in his famous book)--and not just for America and
England but for much of the Continent."

Well, actually McLoughlin says that the Puritan Awakening (which, in
S&H terminology would more or less include both the awakening and the
unraveling eras) ran from 1610-1640, clearly terminating at the
English Civil War.

But now you say that you have information that S&H disagree with
McLoughlin. Could you expand that further? Where else do they
disagree?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> How very magnanimous of you. Rolling Eyes But you do far more than
> correct, or not, a "few inconsistencies". You almost completely
> alter what they define as the function of second and fourth
> turnings, as I have described in previous posts but you never
> answer. Are you afraid to? What gives?

Well, your previous posts rambled on aimlessly, never seeming to go
anywhere but in the swamp. Could you give a list of places where you
believe I "completely alter" their definitions, and try to do so
coherently?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> I wrote a (30+ page) pre-thesis in my graduate program on the
> Great Awakening and became intimate with McLoughlin's ideas, thank
> you. But you can arrogantly assume that you are the only one that
> reads him if it makes you feel better.

> And yes, even after knowing what McLoughlin said it still stands
> that this "flip" of yours explaining the ECW as a 4T is one hell
> of a stretch.

Well, another big surprise! I didn't realize that you were an expert
on the Puritan Awakening and the early 1600s.

As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about. The Puritan
Flip doesn't explain the English Civil War as 4T. What it explains
is why S&H identify the 1630s-40s as an "awakening." S&H focused on
America, and it WAS an awakening there, thanks to the Puritan Flip --
which is hardly a "stretch" since McLoughlin described it. S&H
simply assumed that if America was having an awakening, then so was
England, and that was an incorrect assumption on their part.

Since you're such an expert on the subject, perhaps you can help me
understand. If S&H disagree with McLoughlin, then I assume you must
also. And yet, McLoughlin lays out a fairly detailed timeline of
what went on in England and America from before the 1600s decade in
England through the 1640s in America. Where are the places that you
disagree with McLoughlin? Why do you reject the awakening-type
activities that McLoughlin describes from before 1610? They were
very obviously religious and extremely spiritual in nature, so
exactly what is the nature of your disagreement? In addition, what's
so special about 1621 that the activities are OK after that, but not
before?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> Why is this a problem? WWII occurred during a period of
> fundamental institutional change. WWI solved little in terms of
> that. One is a 4T war and the other is not.

Once again, you're in way over your head.

I've spoken to many, many people about TFT who immediately reject it
-- consider it a worthless piece of trash (in the words of at least
one academic) -- because it ignores WW I.

At the time WW I occurred, it was the biggest war that had every
occurred, but something like almost a factor of 10. It was huge, and
affected everyone in the world, and S&H just sloughs it off.

And you just slough it off: "WWII occurred during a period of
fundamental institutional change. WWI solved little in terms of
that." That's laughable. The Bolshevik Revolution did little in
terms of fundamental institutional change????? The destruction of
the Ottoman Empire and the caliphate in Istanbul did little in terms
of fundamental institutional change?????? You have blinders on.

That's the problem. What's your solution to the problem that so many
people immediately reject TFT because it treats the 2nd hugest war in
world history as completely unimportant?

And what about some other wars -- the Fall of Constantinople, Ottoman
versus Holy League, Crimean War? Europeans took part in all of them.
Do you think that those wars are completely irrelevant as well?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> So dispensing with their definition of a fourth turning (to a
> Crisis War only), adding a fifth turning and fifth archetype to
> their decidedly four-stroke mechanism, radically simplifying their
> intergenerational dynamics, and radically changing the dates they
> identified for turnings and generations (including switching 2T's
> to 4T's and much more) is not leaving S&H behind?!?!? How is it
> not?

Your mind is getting confused again, this time by terminology. I
didn't invent long cycles. I just explained them. If you don't like
5T, the call it an extra-long 4T part 1 and extra-long 4T part 2.
That way you get your "four stroke" mechanism, and nothing's changed.
But changing a term doesn't change the reality.

The question of very long 4Ts has been discussed at length in this
forum, including this thread, with nobody ever proposing any
explanation that I found coherent. That's why I never participated
much in those discussions.

I only jumped into the subject very recently because of new research
that's just been published, by Robert Pape on suicide bombers,
following the July 7 London subway bombings. This brand-new research
is exciting because it sheds so much light on extra-long 4Ts (or 5Ts,
as I like to call them).

I'm puzzled by your attitude (among other things). The research for
TFT was done in the early 90s, and for Generations was done in the
80s. That was a looooooooong time ago, and there's been lots of new
research since then, research that could shed new light on them.

What's your position on TFT? Do you hold it in the same esteem that
the fundamentalist Christians hold the Bible, or that Muslims hold
the Quran -- as the literal inspired word of God, that can never be
disputed in any way?

Do you hold TFT in the same regard - no new research can affect it,
no word can be disputed?

If so, do you have any explanation for why some aspects of S&H's
theory changed between Generations and TFT? Do you think it would
have continued to change after TFT if S&H had continued working on
it?

Many people in this forum have suggested changes to various anomalies
in TFT. There have been whole threads devoted to the Civil War
anomaly alone. Are all those people who suggested other explanations
full of crap?

Are there any things at all in TFT that you consider to be wrong? If
so, could you list a few?

If there are any people in this forum who have suggested changes to
TFT that you approve of, could you name two or three?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> What anomalies?

I guess you weren't paying attention. Do you ever actually read
postings that your respond to, or do you just go off in any direction
you want?

[quote="Peter Gibbons"]
> No contradiction. You don't have to move it to somehow remove the
> English Civil War from it. The ECW was not a 4T war by S&H's
> definition because it was suffused with "inner-world" cultural
> turmoil and ultimately solved nothing in the institutional order.
> By 1660 England was back to having a monarch with Papist
> inclinations who adored the Divine Right concept and a Parliament
> very nervous about those qualities. The change came in the
> Glorious Revolution. What's the problem?

> The problem is you don't recognize a fundamental component of
> S&H's theory which defines what the turnings actually are. To you,
> all great wars must be Crisis Wars. That's NOT S&H's definition
> and entirely changes the theory. You have indeed left S&H behind.
> That may be fine, but to say you are building upon them is
> factually not correct. If I am wrong, please show me how.

Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. I guess the
Revolutionary War wasn't a 4T war either, because by the end there
was still a King in England. What does the fact that there was a
King even have to do with it? Somebody has to run things. You keep
saying the same thing over and over, but you don't provide a coherent
explanation. Why weren't the pre-1610 "inner world" activities which
are very well-documented by McLoughlin the sign of an awakening?

And I don't have to show you're wrong. McLoughlin has already proved
you're wrong. I'm just the messenger.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> It started in 1675, in America. It looks like it started later in
> England. For England, it is likely that the War for Spanish
> Succession was a 4T war for England and all Western Europe. I
> don't see the contradiciton. Where is it?

Omigod! I'm breathless! For once, much to my total astonishment, you
actually have it right! The 4T war in America did INDEED begin in
1675, and the War of the Spanish Succession was INDEED a 4T war for
England. See? We can agree on something.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

> This exemplifies the problem with GD's connection to S&H. They
> were not "by definition" of the Hero archetype. That archetype
> requires more than just fighting in a big war -- there's several
> other components to it, like the type of upbringing, institutional
> problems, how they are perceived by the other archetypes, and so
> on. By simplying 4T's to Crisis Wars and centering your theory
> entirely on Crisis Wars you warp S&H's theory out of all
> recognition. Is this not so? If not, how? ...

> In S&H's definition of a 4T, that crisis continued for several
> years because of the continuation of serious institutional
> upheaval and reconstruction. There was a nasty depression and a
> severe constitutional crisis in the 1780's. And the stability of
> the new constitutional order was questionable until the successful
> conclusion of the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794. How do you have the
> 4T end in 1782?

> Furthermore, serious, comprehensive religious ferver did not break
> out until the early 1820's. The items McLoughlin identifies for
> the very, very 19th century mostly occurred in the hinterlands and
> were not as broad and deep as what came decades later.

> You're reworking to create a "fifth turning" does not fit S&H's
> basic ideas at all. Is that now evident? ...

> Far more in line with their theory, not to mention far more
> parsimonious and therefore approved by Mr. Ockham, would just to
> say that turnings and generations took longer prior to the late
> modern era due to a later age of net social autonomy. The Civil
> War anomaly was just a problem with the adjustment from one length
> to another. No more really necessary. What is your view in light
> of this?

> Also, Mike Alexander has proposed interesting ideas that also
> discount some basic tenets of S&H's theory but he admits to doing
> so, and also still keeps pretty true to their dates. Are you now
> willing to agree that you are actually not in line with
> S&H?

You're back to your old self, giving long, almost incoherent, aimless
ramblings that makes no sense at all. Exactly what does the "later
age of net social autonomy" mean, and what does it have to do with
turning lengths? And how does a change in turning lengths have to do
with an entire hero generation just disappearing into thin air? It's
easy enough to wave your hands and just say "it happened because it
happened," but you haven't given any sort of coherent explanation.

Why was there a hero generation in the Revolutionary War, and one in
WW II, but NOT one in the Civil War? Can you give a "parsimonious"
explanation that isn't just guesswork and hand-waving?

Do you think that there'll be a hero generation in the upcoming 4T?
Why or why not?

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Richard,

Originally Posted by Croakmore

> Well, yes, anyone can resign at any time and obsequiously ask:
> "What can anyone do about it?" I'm going with John on this one
> because I simply do not see a bright future, or at least not a
> bright financial future, for those Americans who have not yet
> arisen to adulthood. They are going to see some hard times (as
> most of us here on T4T like to think). They are going to have to
> pay our debts, not to mention their own (and also not to mention
> the staggering interest owed to the Chinese). They are going to
> hate us for being so goddamn stupid. There will be a vortex, and
> it won't be kind.

It's a generational thing. Kids like him and Sean have fairly
cavalier attitudes towards life because in their disaffection as
Nomads, they hate anything that's important to other generations,
including life itself. That's why crisis wars start.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Matt,

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston10

> I looked on the internet, encyclopedia, and at a few books, and
> there doesn't seem to be any information. I'm going to move onto
> something else. I'll post my findings on here when I am
> done.

That's a good idea. For your first attempt try something easier --
something that's well documented from all points of view.

I hope the circus-like atmosphere in this forum hasn't discouraged
you. If I can be of any further help, let me know.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Jake,

Originally Posted by thenomadjake

> Oh no Croak the boomers will luxuriate until the end of their on
> the enforced generosity of my generation, as will the spoiled
> millenials. What assets we xers do not lose in the crash will be
> taxed at stalinist levels, as will our incomes, and the elected
> thieves in Washington will find some way to make it painful to
> repatriate assets we might have abroad as well, therefore
> discouraging the expatriation of our assets in the first place. No
> one cares about nomads, except our mommas (my boomer/silent cusper
> mother used to come chasing after me to school to give me my
> blazer or sweater if I forgot it, though I think that might have
> been primarily to embarrass me).

> The smartest xers have already left this carnival of fools that
> passes for a country, and have no intention of returning.

It never ceases to amaze me how much you Nomads hate everyone else.
Even your mother just wanted to embarass you. You really are a Lost
generation, aren't you?

But you've made a couple of errors. First, there are Nomads in other
countries as well, and so if you leave you'll find things just as bad
(or worse) elsewhere. And second, the stalinists who are taxing you
will also be Nomads, your brothers and sisters, so complain to each
other, not to us.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Sean,

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Can anyone explain what the following article means? What are
polymorphisms in birds?

Perhaps they mean this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_...e_polymorphism

What little I understand of both articles suggests to me that they're talking about the polymorphisms in the various strains of flu viruses, rather than in the birds.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

How does he reach the conclusion that, "The European sequences also
indicate the H5N1 will be migrating to Europe this season due to the
widespread infections of H5N1 waterfowl in Russia, Mongolia, and
Kazakhstan"???

It looks like he claims the data show that H5N1 has already demonstrated the ability to travel through disease vectors at great distances and speeds. So he expects it to get to Europe very soon.

Thanks for googling "polymorphism" for me.

I was hoping that someone who actually knows something about the
science of recombinations could explain why it's specifically the
polymorphisms, rather than just waterfowl migration paths, that
guarantee a spread to Europe, especially now that the spread of H5N1
through central and west Asia appears to be temporarily stalled.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Matt,

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston10

> I looked on the internet, encyclopedia, and at a few books, and
> there doesn't seem to be any information. I'm going to move onto
> something else. I'll post my findings on here when I am
> done.

That's a good idea. For your first attempt try something easier --
something that's well documented from all points of view.

It's hard to find that when looking at Native American wars. I'm beginning to think this is more difficult than it looks. :wink:

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I hope the circus-like atmosphere in this forum hasn't discouraged you. If I can be of any further help, let me know.

Nope. I've run into a roadblock and if I can't figure it out in the next couple of days I'll let you know.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Sean,

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Can anyone explain what the following article means? What are
polymorphisms in birds?

Perhaps they mean this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_...e_polymorphism

What little I understand of both articles suggests to me that they're talking about the polymorphisms in the various strains of flu viruses, rather than in the birds.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

How does he reach the conclusion that, "The European sequences also
indicate the H5N1 will be migrating to Europe this season due to the
widespread infections of H5N1 waterfowl in Russia, Mongolia, and
Kazakhstan"???

It looks like he claims the data show that H5N1 has already demonstrated the ability to travel through disease vectors at great distances and speeds. So he expects it to get to Europe very soon.

Thanks for googling "polymorphism" for me.

I was hoping that someone who actually knows something about the
science of recombinations could explain why it's specifically the
polymorphisms, rather than just waterfowl migration paths, that
guarantee a spread to Europe, especially now that the spread of H5N1
through central and west Asia appears to be temporarily stalled.

Perhaps he is not aware of this "stalling".

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Jake,

Originally Posted by thenomadjake

> Oh no Croak the boomers will luxuriate until the end of their on
> the enforced generosity of my generation, as will the spoiled
> millenials. What assets we xers do not lose in the crash will be
> taxed at stalinist levels, as will our incomes, and the elected
> thieves in Washington will find some way to make it painful to
> repatriate assets we might have abroad as well, therefore
> discouraging the expatriation of our assets in the first place. No
> one cares about nomads, except our mommas (my boomer/silent cusper
> mother used to come chasing after me to school to give me my
> blazer or sweater if I forgot it, though I think that might have
> been primarily to embarrass me).

> The smartest xers have already left this carnival of fools that
> passes for a country, and have no intention of returning.

It never ceases to amaze me how much you Nomads hate everyone else.
Even your mother just wanted to embarass you. You really are a Lost
generation, aren't you?

But you've made a couple of errors. First, there are Nomads in other
countries as well, and so if you leave you'll find things just as bad
(or worse) elsewhere. And second, the stalinists who are taxing you
will also be Nomads, your brothers and sisters, so complain to each
other, not to us.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Johnny,

Once, in high school, someone called my friend Don (who used to ask if they had a felon discount at restaurants) a racist. He said I can't be a racist. I hate everyone.

See: hating everyone is undiscriminatory (although my mother really is an angel, just one that enjoys embarrassing me).

As for going elsewhere, we nomads have secret scrappy paradises others do not know about.

As for taxes, nomad politicians are in the end politicians, although you'll note that it was FDR and Lincoln that raised everyone's taxes. Truman and Ike might well have cut them down to size were there no heros around, just like the Gildeds did.

The Wall Street Journal

September 26, 2005

When We're All 64

In about 100 days, the first of the baby boomers will turn 60.
Already, this generation has given rise to minivans, Botox and
two-income families. Here's a look at what might come.

By KELLY GREENE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
September 26, 2005; Page R1

Cellphones that monitor your body temperature and sleep patterns.
Cruise ships that take the place of retirement communities. "Brain
gyms" where you sharpen your wits with computer games. Video
autobiographies and interactive cemeteries.

The baby boom is about to enter its golden years -- and getting older
will never be the same.

On Jan. 1, the first of an estimated 77 million baby boomers, those
Americans born from 1946 to 1964, will celebrate their 60th birthday.
Through its sheer size -- and, some would say, self-indulgence -- the
generation has given rise, or given teeth, to a host of fashions and
institutions that are now central to popular culture: rock 'n' roll,
working moms, Earth Day, sport-utility vehicles, Botox, shacking up,
Viagra and Starbucks.

All of which prompts the question: What comes next?

We asked dozens of professionals across the country who track baby
boomers as part of their job, from gerontologists and academics to
marketers and venture capitalists. Their answers -- or educated
guesses -- cover a range of products, services and lifestyles that
could make aging in America more comfortable, convenient and rewarding
-- not to mention entertaining.

Clearly, puzzling out boomers' wants and whims as they move into their
60s and beyond could prove a lucrative exercise. Baby boomers account
for 42% of all U.S. households and control 50% of all consumer
spending, or more than $2 trillion a year, according to a 2002 study
by American Demographics magazine.

Here's a look at how the boomers' movement into later life might
change the economy and society.

LONGEVITY FOR SALE

Boomers are expected to live longer than any previous generation. Men
who reach age 60 can expect to live 20 more years on average; women
who reach 60 can expect to live an additional 23.5 years. With
tremendous spending power at their disposal, boomers may well try to
stay healthy by taking medical treatment into their own hands --
trying all sorts of continuing therapies and experimental fixes for
long-term health problems.

"Longevity will be for sale," says Ken Dychtwald, a San Francisco
gerontologist and consultant for the health-care and
financial-services industries. "You or a loved one has a condition for
which there's no cure in the U.S. But you hear there's a breakthrough
cure in Germany, so you're going to write a big check to cure the
disease and live longer."

Boomers tracking chronic problems also may embrace home technology
that gives quick updates on fluctuating blood pressure, glucose
levels, cholesterol and so forth. These tools, some of which are
already in development, would allow boomers to track their conditions
more effectively and seek medical attention more quickly when needed.

"Consumer-directed health could merge with entertainment," says Joseph
Coughlin, director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's
AgeLab in Cambridge. "Companies like Philips Electronics and Comcast
could enter strategic alliances to offer health services through
television."

So, your computer might come with an arm cuff to let you check your
blood pressure and view the results on screen. Or your cellphone,
which you probably wear anyway, could automatically monitor your body
temperature, sleep patterns and typical interaction with other people
"to develop a trend line," says Eric Dishman, general manager and
director of Intel Corp.'s Health Research and Innovation Group in
Hillsboro, Ore.

> BOOMERS BY THE NUMBERS

> The estimated number of baby boomers, in millions, in the U.S.
> 76.9

> The percentage of the nation's population made up of baby boomers
> 26.8

> The percentage of boomers who are women 51

> The percentage of boomers who are minorities 16.9

> The number of boomers, in millions, who already are age 50 or
> older 32

> The percentage of the population that boomers will make up in 25
> years, when they will be ages 66 to 84 20

> Average annual spending, in dollars, by boomer households 45,654

> The poverty rate, in percent, for boomers in 2000, lower than for
> any other segment of the population 7.3

> Number of states (California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New
> Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas) where more than
> half of all boomers live 9

> The divorce rate, in percent, for boomers 14.2

> The divorce rate, in percent, for the pre-boomer generation, those
> 65 and older 6.7

> The percentage of boomers who have never married 12.6

> The percentage of those 65 and over who have never married 3.9

> Percentage of boomers who voted in the 2000 presidential election
> 59

> Percentage of boomers who completed high school 88.8

> Percentage of boomers who have a bachelor's degree or higher 28.5

> Source: MetLife Mature Market Institute

Already, the AgeLab has developed a handheld gadget, called the
"personal smart adviser," that scans bar codes in the grocery store
and compares product ingredients with guidance provided by your
doctor. The prototype has been tested by diabetic boomers and their
caregivers. Now a consumer-products company and a grocery chain are
considering commercializing it, Dr. Coughlin says.

Also expect an explosion of already-popular nutraceuticals -- natural
foods, vitamins or supplements packed with health benefits, such as
the arthritis treatment glucosamine, derived from shellfish shells.
Then there are cosmeceuticals, or cosmetics that help rejuvenate the
body, such as antiwrinkle and baldness treatments that repair the skin
or hair follicles.

"The performance of these types of products will continue to improve,"
says Pamela Prokop, an analyst with Freedonia Group, a Cleveland
marketing firm.

Ms. Prokop projects that sales of anti-aging potions and lotions will
increase 8.7% annually, reaching $30.7 billion in 2009.

WORK, TAKE TWO

A GI bill for retirement? Marc Freedman, president of Civic Ventures,
a San Francisco nonprofit, wants to see a plan of that magnitude to
connect older people with opportunities to do good work, either as
paid employees or volunteers -- and thereby "help boomers cross a
great distance in lifespan and age."

Research shows great interest among baby boomers in staying
productive. For example, 75% of boomers intend to keep working in
retirement, a recent survey by Merrill Lynch found. But they expect to
retire from their current jobs at the average age of 64 -- then launch
a new career.

Some want a new job that's more personally rewarding; others want the
same type of work, only on a much more flexible schedule. In their new
jobs, 42% of boomers want to cycle between periods of work and
leisure, according to the Merrill research. (The findings, taken from
interviews with 2,300 people ages 40 to 58 last year, have a
two-percentage-point margin of error.)

But how are boomers going to find those new jobs, or negotiate those
new schedules? Mr. Freedman's group is helping to create a network of
later-life career coaches who help boomers ease their way back into
the work force.

His group has begun a "Next Chapter" initiative with libraries,
community colleges and other local programs across the country,
helping them set up programs and gathering spots where people nearing
retirement can get "directions and connections" to help figure out
their next step. As increasing numbers of boomers join self-help
groups and seek counseling about later life, Mr. Freedman thinks the
start-up organizations "will [turn] into established institutions that
have greater heft," and that the job counselors will develop
professional credentials akin to certified financial planners.

But counseling is only the first step. Once they identify what they
want to do, boomers are going to demand "simpler, fast-track versions"
of traditional educational programs in professions such as teaching
and nursing, says Judy Goggin, Civic Ventures' senior vice president,
who has been working with local organizers of Next Chapter programs.

"They aren't going to like it if someone in the administrative
bureaucracy of a community college says, 'You're going to have to take
this pile of coursework that we've determined 18-year-olds need to
take,' " Ms. Goggin says. "It's not going to be the same as what
they'd need if they were entering the field as a young person."

LIVING TOGETHER

Later life could signal a return to communal living for boomers,
particularly as increasing numbers of single, divorced and widowed
people seek a lifestyle that's more affordable, social and
supportive.

Some groups may settle in neighborhoods where everyone shares a common
interest, such as Harley-Davidson enthusiasts "who wear their leathers
together and ride their bikes as long as they can," says Brent Green,
a Denver marketing consultant who studies boomers. The other extreme
could be "people gathering in communities they build together with the
common cause of easing the aging process, right into their graves."

Sandra Timmerman, director of the MetLife Mature Market Institute, a
resource center on aging in Westport, Conn., says her friends talk a
lot about whether to buy a house together. "You might cook together,
or have a room for a home-care worker [to stay in] if someone gets
sick and needs it. You could have a chauffeur, since so many people
can't drive or have trouble at night."

Boomers have already begun to discover "co-housing developments."
These neighborhoods, in which residents live in private homes but
share a central "common house" with a kitchen and other service
facilities, were designed for anybody interested in living communally
or conserving resources, such as environmentalists. But they have
become increasingly popular with older residents.

In the 82 co-housing neighborhoods that have been built since 1991,
one-third of the residents are retirees, says Neshama Abraham, a
co-housing consultant in Boulder, Colo. Now, one of the first such
developments specifically for people 50 and older is under
construction. Silver Sage Cohousing, in Boulder, includes a common
building with a kitchen, dining room, library, guest rooms and a
treatment room for visiting doctors, physical therapists and other
health workers.

A large part of the appeal, Ms. Abraham says, is the "idea of aging in
a community. A lot of people talk about aging in place, but it can be
very isolating." The hope is that residents can get a lot of their
medical needs on site -- and help each other more easily through
crises.

On the other hand, some people may give up the idea of a house
entirely. Geriatrician Lee Lindquist found through a study last fall
that living on a cruise ship would cost about the same as in an
assisted-living facility: $33,260 for a year-round cruise versus
$28,689 for a year at the average assisted-living facility. (A
high-end facility would cost $48,000 or more.) The cruise would
provide essentially the same services, including escorts to meals,
dining, help with medicine and housekeeping -- plus "look at how much
more you're getting on a cruise ship -- the midnight buffet, the
pools, and you're treated as a customer, not a patient," Dr. Lindquist
says.

She got the idea while on a cruise to the Caribbean with her parents.
A few of the other older travelers on the ship said they had been on
20 cruises in the past year -- meaning they were living on a boat
about every other week. Boomers she has interviewed say they like the
notion. "Part of the appeal is that they wouldn't be with all older
people," Dr. Lindquist says. "They'd be mixed in with the frat boys
and newlyweds, so they would feel less like it was a nursing home."

PERSONAL TECHNOLOGY

What's likely to be one of hottest areas of research and development?
Brain science, says MIT's Dr. Coughlin. "If you look at universities,
it's where the huge money is going." One start-up company, Posit
Science Corp. of San Francisco, already is trying to capitalize on the
trend, rolling out memory-building computer games in Bay area
retirement communities. The company claims that the hundreds of older
people using its software in preliminary tests have the mental acuity
of someone five to 10 years younger. Posit plans to have home versions
of the games out by next year. Within a decade, the company hopes to
kick-start "brain gyms" as well as online "cognitive-fitness centers,"
where seniors can play the games in a group environment, says Jeffrey
Zimman, chief executive.

It's not as far-fetched as it sounds, some observers say. "Traditional
physical-fitness-oriented facilities [that] understand that a
significant part of the market is boomers are going to start
developing places for people to go to exercise their brain function,"
says Mr. Green, the marketer in Denver. Although boomers could play
computer games at home, "people want social reinforcement," meaning
they are likely to either seek out special places to go through the
games or join a Web-based service that would connect them online with
other brain-exercisers.

Intel's team of social scientists is developing computerized memory
aids, too. The gadgets grew out of a study, begun in 1999, "about
digital entertainment that wound up being about dementia," says the
company's Mr. Dishman. As he spent time in boomer households, trying
to show them what they could do with digital TV and broadband access,
"they would say, 'I don't need another way to watch TV. I need help
taking care of my parents,' or 'I have to figure out how to manage my
diabetes.' "

So Intel shifted its focus and developed potential aids for older
adults. One gadget, tested in two dozen households in Las Vegas and
Portland, Ore., was designed to help people ease their fears of not
recognizing a face or voice when answering the door or telephone.
Intel used wireless sensor networks to collect data for four months
about who visited, called and emailed the participants, and how often.
The data were used to create a "solar-system display" on a TV or
computer screen. Circles representing friends and family orbit around
you; when you move the mouse over those circles, you see photos of the
people they represent, along with the last time you spoke to them and
what you talked about.

Similarly, Intel developed what designers dubbed "caller ID on
steroids." When the phone rings, a nearby digital photo frame displays
a picture of the caller and lists what you talked about during your
last call. The "presence lamp" was also a big hit among test subjects.
One of these lights is placed in the parent's house, one in the
child's. When the child returns home after a visit, the light
automatically goes on in the parent's house, and vice versa. The
gadget lowered depression among the older adults with Alzheimer's
disease by showing them their kids had gotten home safely. It also
alerted a few boomers when their parents got lost on the drive home
after they had dinner together.

"It was in crude prototype, and needed a lot of baby-sitting by our
engineers," says Mr. Dishman. But when the trial was over, "the people
said, 'No, don't take this away from me.' " Now Intel hopes that the
computer makers that buy its chips will bring these products to
market.

GETTING AROUND

Whatever boomers drive in future decades will be a big deal: Of the 13
cars that the average American household buys over a lifetime, seven
are purchased after the head of the household turns 50, says Art
Spinella, president of CNW Marketing Research, a consulting firm in
Bandon, Ore.

That number could head even higher, says Rob Tregenza, transportation
analyst for Minneapolis-based market researcher Iconoculture Inc., who
expects many boomer couples to add a third car. They covet what he
calls "aspirational" vehicles that display their personal style.
Muscle cars, for instance, are starting to make a comeback. Already,
Ford Motor Co. has revived the classic Mustang body, and "there have
been rumors that GM is going to start diving into the arsenal of
Camaros," he says.

While boomers want to flex their muscles on the road, they also want
to be as safe as possible when doing so. Many car makers are starting
to tinker with options designed for older customers, but marketable to
all ages: vision enhancement, which typically uses ultrasound or
infrared technology to make it easier to see at night;
collision-warning systems; swivel seats, making it easier to get in
and out; and heated seats in cooler climes so drivers and their
passengers can use them to help bad backs.

Even with all that, boomers won't be able to drive forever. So what
happens when they must quit -- but find themselves living in
cul-de-sac suburbs with little public transportation? MIT's Dr.
Coughlin predicts the emergence of car clubs. People who no longer
drive may pool their resources to buy a car, then share it with a
younger driver who serves as a chauffeur. This would be particularly
attractive in college towns filled with graduate students who can't
afford their own wheels.

"We do a very good job of getting older adults around [via vans and
ambulances] for trips they need. We do a terrible job with trips they
want," he says. "The boomers are a generation of wants. They are going
to make sure transportation is as seamless for them to get ice cream
as it is to get a prescription renewed."

Already, local aging agencies are experimenting with driving pools.
The Atlanta Regional Commission, for example, has sold discounted
vouchers to 20 people who are at least 60 and can't drive, allowing
them to hire someone they know to drive them around rather than
relying on formal government programs for help. They are finding that
the $16.79 average cost "buys a trip to the doctor, plus the grocery
store, drugstore and bank, instead of just the doctor. And the driver
helps you in and out of the car and waits for you while you're there,"
says Kathryn Lawler, the project director.

LEISURE QUEST

Despite the fact that some boomers will struggle financially as they
age, a sizable number are expected to have enough money to fuel the
market for increasingly exotic travel. IExplore Inc., a Chicago-based
adventure-travel company, already has received requests from boomers
in the past year to sea-kayak the Panama Canal, take champagne flights
to the North Pole, live with a Mongolian family in the Gobi Desert,
walk the rainforest tree canopies of the Amazon and see the Serengeti
in a hot-air balloon.

"Boomers have been in an aggressive period of accumulating assets --
homes, cars, boats," says George Deeb, iExplore's chief executive.
"Now they're going to get into a period of accumulating experiences."

To that end, Dr. Dychtwald, the San Francisco gerontologist, expects
to see "experience agents," a career counselor-cum-travel agent. "You
could go to them and say, 'Look, I'm 57, I'm going to take a year off,
and I don't know what to do. Help me with a plan,' " he says. "You
might spend three months on an archaeological dig, four months living
on an island."

Ironically, the onslaught of boomers could endanger a relatively new
retirement institution: the country's 500-plus lifelong-learning
institutes, most of them affiliated with local colleges (many are
listed at www.elderhostel.org/ein/intro.asp5). The programs typically
offer college-level courses and are open to anyone over a specific
age, usually 55 or 60, regardless of previous academic experience.

But age-segregated programs could have trouble drawing boomers as
members, warns Ron Manheimer, director of the North Carolina Center
for Creative Retirement, a lifelong-learning institute in Asheville.
His center has done extensive focus groups with local boomers,
including some already attending its programs, to figure out what
they're looking for. His findings: Boomers are "just so diverse in
what they want," from the types of classes they'd like to see to the
time segments in which they're offered -- making it hard to build a
traditional course schedule that will interest a broad range of
potential students.

One new approach the center is trying: a full-year program that goes
into more depth than the typical semester-length or shorter course,
culminating in a certificate of completion. The first experiment, the
Blue Ridge Naturalist, is targeted to those wanting to better
understand and appreciate the natural environment. The class is
meeting Tuesday nights and in the field one Saturday each month,
addressing topics as diverse as the heritage of Native Americans,
folklore and the night sky.

Likewise, Boston-based Elderhostel Inc., one of the most successful
providers of educational-travel programs for older adults, is trying
to attract younger clients with its Road Scholar program. Rolled out
last year, the program offers a series of trips with smaller groups,
more free time and fewer lectures -- features that Elderhostel thinks
adults in their 50s and early 60s are looking for. In the first year,
1,700 people signed up. The most popular trips: a spiritual journey
through India and a look at criminal forensics.

LEGACY -- THE MOVIE

"Boomers are going to figure out really creative ways of expressing
their death," possibly by producing video autobiographies, says Mr.
Green, the marketer. For instance, he says he has met with an
entrepreneur currently trying to figure out how to set up production
studios in shopping malls where boomers can bring in their photos,
home-movie footage "of when you were the prom queen" and other
memorabilia, then work with a script writer to produce something akin
to a Biography Channel segment.

Cemeteries are expected to go digital as well, both with records of
gravestones online for genealogical research, as well as for
nostalgia's sake. "We should expect to see interactive displays about
people, where you can push a button and get a two-minute take on that
person's life," Mr. Green says. "And that will also be captured in
perpetuity on the Internet."

Boomers have a stronger need than their parents and grandparents "to
leave a legacy, and it's going to be a very big business," says David
Wolfe, a Reston, Va., marketing consultant who studies the older
population. He recently pitched a project to Konica Minolta Holdings
Inc. that would help guide boomers on their memoirs, "because a lot of
this is about imaging."

What about funerals? Already, boomers are personalizing their parents'
memorials, and will probably customize their own memorials in more
elaborate ways, says Mark Duffey, chief executive of Everest Funeral
Package LLC in Houston, a start-up company that sells independent
funeral-planning services. One possibility: creative souvenirs. At a
funeral he recently attended, "this guy's dad was a great cook, so he
printed off his recipes, bound them up and handed out these books of
all the recipes he never gave away."

Cremation has been increasing about one percentage point a year for
the past decade, and that's expected to surge with the boomers, Mr.
Duffey adds. Instead of having full-fledged funerals, Mr. Duffey's
clients are asking, why not "a memorial service at my church, or a
party at a restaurant?" he says. "There's a trend of people wanting to
have this celebration, a party in honor of their friends. Once people
go to a few of these, it's going to accelerate."

--Ms. Greene is a staff reporter in The Wall Street Journal's Atlanta
bureau.

Write to Kelly Greene at encore@wsj.com 6.
URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1...646296,00.html

Hyperlinks in this Article:
(1) http://online.wsj.com/page/0,,2_1182,00.html
(2) http://online.wsj.com/page/0,,2_1182,00.html
(3) http://mp3.marketwatch.com/wsj/audio...-wsjgreene.mp3
(4) http://mp3.marketwatch.com/wsj/audio...-wsjgreene.mp3
(5) http://www.elderhostel.org/ein/intro.asp
(6) mailto:encore@wsj.com
Copyright 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59

Clark,

It's not clear what the cycles you refer to are in terms of. Elliot wave is technical analysis method first developed in the 1930's. Pretcher is probably the most famous exponent of the Elliot wave. He is credited for forecasting the 1987 crash, but since then has been very bearish. Recently he has expanded his ideas to more than just the stock market, but I am not familiar with this work.

Harry Dent has blended the Kondratiev long wave, which is often considered to be an innovation or technological cycle with the saeculum to give an 80-year cycle. Into this he weaves demographics. His focus is economic and uses his cycle ideas in his consulting work.

Both of these analysts are primarily concerned with economic or financial matters.

Mike,

Sorry for the delay in responding. I probably won't be posting much.

I look at cycles mostly in terms of events (and sequences of events) within cycles and across cycles and in terms of the function of events within the cycle worldview. My analysis tends toward fractal and geometric terms rather than fixed terms.

Here’s a basic example of two event sequences that have occurred within different cycles in the Industrial/Information Age worldview:

1835 (First Railroad Boom High) + 152 = 1987 (First Tech Boom High?)
1837 (Panic) + 150 = 1987 (Crash)
1844-1850 (Telegraph) + 150 = 1994-2000 (Internet)
1850 (Union and Confederate States) + 150 = 2000 (Red and Blue States)
1852 (Second Railroad Boom High) + 148 = 2000 (Second Tech Boom High?)
1857 (Land Bubble Bursts) + 148 = 2005 (Housing Bubble Bursts?)

Note: I do not necessarily expect another Civil War but do expect a resolution of the Red States/Blue States conflict.

Within the Industrial/Information Age worldview, event sequences are mostly in financial and technological terms, in accordance with the worldview. In the previous Exploration/Commercial Age worldview, though, events at the same point in the cycle are not necessarily in those terms and are more difficult to identify since we no longer think in accordance with that worldview.

Generally, the function of an event or event sequence is to facilitate the progression of the worldview and thus the continuation of the cycle. For example, during the beginning stages of both the Exploration/Commercial and Industrial/Information Ages, the new worldviews were impeded by remnants of the old. Piracy and religious persecution impeded exploration and commerce and, similarly, slavery impeded industrialization. Both of these impediments were removed by events at the same points in the cycles.

Initially, I brought up Dent and Prechter because John had stated on his website that Prechter’s projection for a bear market low of Dow Jones 1000 or so was unrealistic and that Dent’s projection for a strong continuation of the bull market was also unrealistic. Although both have been (Prechter) or probably will be (Dent) wrong over a 3-5 year time frame and they get to their conclusions using different methods than I do, their big picture conclusions seem to have merit.

As far as I know, nobody studies cycles using any similar methods. I work alone full time and analyze smaller cycles in a similar manner and use them to help time the longer term cycles.

John,

I'm currently working on the Iroquois, and I have run into a little problem.

I figured that all the tribes would be on the same timeline and it seemed that this was the case. The Iroquois league formed sometime around 1570, presumably after years of constant tribal warfare. This would indicate the time before 1570 as a crisis, and around 1570 as the austerity.

There was a good deal of fighting but nothing like what happened during the first phase of the Beaver Wars (1628-1680 is the first phase). More specifically, there was very heavy fighting from the mid 1630s to about 1656. The war didn't end, but the energy was sapped. There were attempts at peace etc. etc. It just wasn't like the constant war and slaughter of the years before.

However, throughout the next 30 or so years, there are isolated incidents of an Iroquois war party raiding a village and killing everyone. I chose to put the end of the crisis war at 1656 (climax 1649), and assumed that there would be little indication of a crisis until well after 1700. But in 1680, the Seneca send an enormous war party to slaughter the Illinois as revenge for killing a Seneca sachem. Thousands of people were killed with many villages razed. There were many other incidents like this, although not as large.

Dear Matt,

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston10

> I'm currently working on the Iroquois, and I have run into a
> little problem.

> I figured that all the tribes would be on the same timeline and it
> seemed that this was the case. The Iroquois league formed sometime
> around 1570, presumably after years of constant tribal warfare.
> This would indicate the time before 1570 as a crisis, and around
> 1570 as the austerity.

> There was a good deal of fighting but nothing like what happened
> during the first phase of the Beaver Wars (1628-1680 is the first
> phase). More specifically, there was very heavy fighting from the
> mid 1630s to about 1656. The war didn't end, but the energy was
> sapped. There were attempts at peace etc. etc. It just wasn't like
> the constant war and slaughter of the years before.

> However, throughout the next 30 or so years, there are isolated
> incidents of an Iroquois war party raiding a village and killing
> everyone. I chose to put the end of the crisis war at 1656 (climax
> 1649), and assumed that there would be little indication of a
> crisis until well after 1700. But in 1680, the Seneca send an
> enormous war party to slaughter the Illinois as revenge for
> killing a Seneca sachem. Thousands of people were killed with many
> villages razed. There were many other incidents like this,
> although not as large.

I'm not familiar with these wars, so all I know about them is what
you've told me, supplemented by a Wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Iroquois_Wars
All conclusions would have to be supported by additional sources.

I agree with you that the formation of the Iroquois league in 1570
would likely indicate that a crisis war had just ended. This is
exactly the kind of thing that a crisis war settlement brings.

And I also agree with you that the next crisis war climaxes in 1649,
but I believe that the crisis period ends there, not in 1656.

What is extremely significant in the Wikipedia article is something
that's barely mentioned: "The Iroquois lands comprised an ethnic
island, surrounded on all sides by Algonquian-speaking tribes,
including the Shawnee to the west in the Ohio Country, as well as by
Iroquoian-speaking Huron on the north along the St. Lawrence River,
who were not part of the Iroquois Confederation."

Why were the Iroquoian-speaking Huron not part of the Iroquois
Confederation? This kind of thing is a really big deal. There could
be many reasons, but almost all of them portend a painful compromise
that will unravel and lead to another crisis war. If any of your
sources have further information on this question, I'm fairly certain
it will yield a lot of information about the generational cycle of
the Iroquois nation at this time.

So, later in the article there's a heading, "Iroquois attacks in New
France." This is what you might call a "euro-centric" heading,
because the brief description makes it clear that the Iroquois were
not attacking the French; they were attacking the Huron: "The war
began in the early 1640s with Iroquois attacks on Huron villages along
the St. Lawrence, with the intent of disrupting the Huron trade with
the French. By 1649, the Iroquois had driven the Huron from the lower
St. Lawrence into regions farther north, leaving the Ottawa to fill
the vacuum in the fur trade with the French." That would be the
climax of the crisis war with the Huron.

The article refers to a technique called "la petite guerre,"
something that we'd call guerrilla warfare. Your description talks
about this as "isolated incidents of an Iroquois war party raiding a
village and killing everyone." This is not crisis war material, even
if everyone in a small village was killed, though usually women and
children were not killed, but were taken as prizes. It's being
practiced today in the form of terrorism (e.g., the London subway
bombings, or the 9/11 attacks).

So the Iroquois attacks on the French were this kind of warfare. When
the French counterattacked, the invasion was "abortive," and then "the
Iroquois sued for peace, which lasted a generation."
The war "resumed in 1683," but the article leaves unclear whether
there was a real war, or resumption of the guerrilla attacks. What's
most likely is that the real war began in the 1690s, since "The Great
Peace" agreement was signed in 1698. That would be the climax of the
next crisis war.

All of this needs further research, especially the period 1683-98,
but I've looked at a million of these things and this seems the most
likely timeline, based on this one source. So the three crisis wars
end in 1570, 1649 and 1698, respectively. The last intercrisis period is
unusually short, but this isn't too exceptional as some 10% (as I
recall) of all intercrisis periods are 40-50 years long.

After that, the next crisis war would probably be the Seven Years War
(also called the French and Indian wars), ending in 1763. After
that, we'd have the crisis Napoleonic Wars in Europe, linked to the
non-crisis War of 1812 in America, linked to new wars around the
Mississippi with the French and Indians around 1810. (This last is
VERY speculative, based on something I barely remember reading a long
time ago.)

At any rate, I hope this helps. I think you're on the right track,
and very close to nailing the whole thing down. By the way, if you
find any link to King Philip's war, that would be interesting too.

Also keep merging timelines in mind. When two regions on different
timelines have wars with each other, it's possible that the timelines
merge, or it's possible that the war is a crisis war for one side and
a non-crisis war for the other. Eventually, however, all timelines
merge.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

John,

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

but I believe that the crisis period ends there, not in 1656.

I don't know why I put 1656. I meant 1651. 1649 is the beginning of the great pursuit, and what happened in 1651 is the result. I don't have much on this, but I think either works. I'll accept 1649 since the main fighting ended there.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

What's most likely is that the real war began in the 1690s, since "The Great Peace" agreement was signed in 1698.

OK. I had the next crisis war from 1689-1696. The mid-cycle period is awfully short, but not too terrible. I'll look into this.


edit:

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

After that, the next crisis war would probably be the Seven Years War

I actually found the American Revolution to be the crisis war for the Iroquois, with the dissolution of the Iroquois league and the "great peace" expiring.