Why is it helpful to write down your budget?

It helps you see where your money is going

It makes it harder to spend money

It helps you forget about your money

What is one way to stick to your budget?

Use cash instead of credit cards

Spend money on everything you want

How does having a budget help you save money?

It shows you how much you can spend and save

It tells you to spend all your money

It helps you forget about saving

Why is tracking your spending important?

It helps you know if you're sticking to your budget

You won't have any money left if you track it

It doesn't matter what you spend

Only adults need to track their spending

What is a good reason to create a budget?

To save money for things you really want

To spend all your money quickly

What should you do if you see you went over your budget?

Change your spending for the next month

Raise your budget without planning

Ask someone to give you more money

Why is it helpful to set goals in your budget?

It gives you something to work towards with your money

Setting goals is only for school

Goals make spending more confusing

Goals have nothing to do with money

What is one benefit of having a budget for your allowance?

It helps you decide how much to save and spend

It tells you to spend all your allowance at once

What should you do if you find a way to save some money in your budget?

Put that extra money towards your savings goal

How does having a budget help people? o Why do you think writing down your budget is helpful? o How often do you think you should review your budget? o What are some ways you can stick to your budget?

In this video we take a look at the 0:02 fetch to code 0:03 execute cycle including its effect on 0:06 the various registers we've previously 0:12 [Music] 0:14 discussed a computer is defined Definition 0:17 as an electronic device that takes an 0:20 input 0:22 processes data 0:25 and delivers output 0:29 in this simple example you can see we're 0:31 taking the input 5 0:35 we're multiplying it by 2 that's our 0:37 process 0:39 and we're outputting 10. 0:44 but this could be way more complex for 0:46 example of a game console 0:48 the input could be the buttons you press 0:50 on a controller 0:53 the processes would then be carried out 0:55 by the console itself 0:59 and the output would be some form of 1:01 update to a monitor 1:02 and sound out for a speaker possibly 1:04 vibration feedback through the 1:06 controller 1:10 to process data a computer follows a set 1:13 of instructions 1:14 known as a computer program 1:18 if we take the lid off a typical desktop 1:20 computer we can identify 1:22 two critical components the memory 1:26 that stores the program and the central 1:29 processing unit or processor 1:31 which is under this large fan and 1:33 carries out the instructions 1:37 a computer carries out its function by 1:40 fetching 1:41 instructions decoding them and then 1:43 executing them 1:44 in a continuous repetitive cycle 1:46 billions of times a second 1:48 let's look at each of these stages in a 1:50 little more detail Fetch 1:53 so let's start with the fetch stage the 1:55 very first thing that happens 1:57 is the program counter is checked as it 2:00 holds the address 2:01 of the next instruction to be executed 2:07 the address stored is then copied into 2:09 the memory address register 2:14 the address is then sent along the 2:16 address bus to main memory 2:18 where it waits to receive a signal from 2:21 the control 2:22 bus so it knows what to do 2:27 as we want to read the data that's 2:29 stored in memory address 2:30 0 0 0 0 the control unit sends 2:34 a read signal along the control bus to 2:36 main memory 2:41 now main memory knows the data needs to 2:44 be read 2:45 the content stored in memory address 000 2:49 can be sent along the data bus to the 2:51 memory data register 2:56 now as we're currently in the process of 2:58 fetching an instruction 3:00 the data received by the memory data 3:03 register gets copied 3:04 into the current instruction register 3:11 the instruction effectively has now been 3:14 fetched from memory 3:16 just before we proceed to the decode 3:18 phase we now 3:19 increment the program counter so that 3:22 the address it contains 3:24 points to the address of the next 3:26 instruction which will need to be 3:30 executed 3:32 the instruction now being held in the 3:33 current instruction register 3:35 is ready to be decoded 3:39 now as we mentioned in the previous 3:41 video the instruction is made up of two 3:43 parts 3:44 we have the op code that's what it is we 3:47 need to do 3:50 and we have the operand what are we 3:53 going to do it to 3:55 now the operand could contain the actual 3:57 data 3:58 or indeed it could contain an address of 4:01 where the data is to be found 4:06 by decoding this instruction we can see 4:08 the operation we need 4:10 is a load operation so we need to load 4:14 the contents of memory location0101 4:18 into the cpus accumulator 4:25 in the exam a simple model will be used 4:27 to describe the 4:29 structure of any given instruction 4:32 you're not going to be expected to 4:34 define how an opcode is made up 4:36 but simply to interpret opcodes in the 4:39 given context of an exam 4:40 question in the example here 4:44 you can see there's a total of 16 4:46 different opcodes available 4:48 and this is because we're using four 4:50 bits for our representation 4:56 so now we've fetched the instruction and 4:59 we've decoded it so we know what we need 5:00 to do 5:01 we're finally ready to execute it 5:05 so we now send address 0101 5:08 to the memory dress register 5:13 now we're in the memory address register 5:15 we can finally send the address 5:18 down the address bus to main memory 5:24 this time we want to read the data 5:26 that's stored in memory 5:28 and so the control unit again sends a 5:30 read signal along the control bus 5:36 so main memories now receive an address 5:38 and a read signal 5:40 so the content stored at memory location 5:43 0101 5:44 can now be sent along the data bus back 5:46 to the cpu 5:47 and into the memory data register 5:54 finally the contents of the memory data 5:56 register are copied to the accumulator 5:59 and this is one of a number of general 6:00 purpose registers found in the cpu 6:04 this first instruction is now complete Branching 6:11 so what does this program actually do 6:14 you should be able to work it through 6:16 carefully and figure it out 6:19 we're now pointing instructions zero 6:21 zero zero one in the program counter 6:23 and we're ready to fetch the second 6:25 instruction 6:27 at the end of this video we're gonna 6:29 provide you with the answer 6:34 so let's talk a second about programs 6:37 that branch 6:40 on the left here we have a very simple 6:42 piece of pseudo code 6:44 line zero says first execute this line 6:46 of code 6:47 line 1 now execute this line and then 6:50 line 2 says 6:52 if the age is greater than 18 then 6:56 we're going to execute lines 3 and 4 6:58 otherwise 6:59 we're going to execute lines six and 7:02 seven 7:03 so this program doesn't necessarily 7:05 follow strictly in sequence from line 7:07 zero through to seven there's a chance 7:10 here the program may branch and jump 7:14 around 7:16 so we're going to pretend that this 7:17 program has been loaded into memory 7:20 each line of code on the left here has 7:23 ended up 7:24 as a location in memory now this is not 7:27 strictly how this would happen in this 7:28 one-to-one way 7:29 but for the purpose of example it's 7:31 absolutely fine 7:35 so the program counter starts by 7:37 pointing to memory address zero 7:39 and we fetch the first instruction 7:41 decode it and execute it 7:44 it then updates and tells us the next 7:47 instruction 7:48 is zero zero zero one because remember 7:50 the program counter is being incremented 7:52 so we fetch it decode it and we execute 7:55 line one of our program 7:59 we then fetch line two which in binary 8:01 is one 8:02 zero 8:06 now at this point depending on what 8:10 happens during the execution 8:11 of line two the program may be required 8:15 to fetch line three from memory or 8:18 line five from memory 8:25 so let's look at how this actually works 8:27 because we've said the program counter 8:28 simply gets incremented 8:31 well in the current instruction register 8:33 we have an instruction with the op code 8:36 0 1 1 0. 8:41 now when we look this up in the decode 8:43 unit we discover that this 8:45 code means branch always 8:51 this replaces the value held in the 8:54 program counter 8:56 with the contents of the operand that's 8:58 the second part of the instruction 9:01 from the current instruction register so 9:03 this case 9:04 one zero zero one 9:09 now when the next fetch cycle begins the 9:12 program counter is obviously checked 9:14 and as its contents have been previously 9:16 updated to a new memory location 9:19 and not simply incremented the program 9:22 effectively is able to jump 9:24 around memory 9:28 so having watched this video you should 9:30 be able to answer the following key 9:32 question 9:33 how does a cpu work 9:39 okay so let's um answer the question we 9:41 posed 9:42 earlier what did that program actually 9:48 do 9:50 so this is the first fetch to code 9:53 execute cycle 9:55 and this is the one that we ran through 9:57 in detail earlier 9:58 it effectively loaded the contents of 10:01 the memory 10:02 stored at location location0101 10:05 into the accumulator in other words 10:08 the dna number 3 is moved 10:11 from memory into the cpu 10:18 we then proceed onto the second fetch 10:20 decode execute cycle 10:23 now this one adds the contents of memory 10:27 located at 0 1 1 0 10:30 to the current contents of the 10:32 accumulator 10:34 so in other words the dna number one 10:38 because that's what's stored at address 10:40 zero one one zero 10:43 is added to the number three that was in 10:45 the accumulator 10:46 the results are stored back over the 10:48 accumulator 10:49 so effectively we've done three plus one 10:53 equals four 10:58 the third fetch to code execute cycle 11:00 stores the contents which are in the 11:02 accumulator 11:03 into memory location zero one one one 11:07 and that's because the op code the first 11:09 part of this current instruction 11:10 zero zero one one is the command to 11:13 store when we look it up in the decoder 11:15 unit 11:16 so in other words the result of the 11:17 previous calculation three plus one 11:19 equals four 11:20 is now written back into main memory 11:28 the fourth fetch decode execute cycle 11:30 outputs the contents of the accumulator 11:33 remember they were copied into main 11:34 memory but they're still held in the 11:35 accumulator 11:37 so in this simple abstraction the number 11:40 four is now 11:41 output to the user so they can see the 11:43 result of the calculation 11:49 the fifth and final fetch code execute 11:51 cycle 11:52 brings a halt to the current program 11:58 so this very simple program which has 12:01 five 12:02 fetch decode execute cycles has 12:04 performed the calculation 12:06 three plus one is then stored the result 12:09 in main memory 12:10 and displayed the result four to the 12:12 user 12:13 and in a high-level language this may 12:15 look something very similar to the 12:17 following two lines of code 12:20 sum variable equals num1 plus num2 12:24 print sum to the user 12:27 so you can start to get an appreciation 12:29 here of how the high level code you 12:32 write actually ends up being fetched 12:34 decoded 12:35 and executed inside a processor 12:38 of course your processor is doing 12:40 billions and billions of these 12:42 operations a second 12:43 which when you think about it is really 12:45 very impressive 12:52 [Music] 13:03 you. make 10 questions for a standerd of a level

1. Which factor is most crucial to verify first when selecting an ICT resource for instruction? A) Content alignment with the textbook B) Alignment with learning objectives C) The resource's popularity among peers D) Cost-effectiveness of the resource 2. When evaluating ICT resources, what is the purpose of checking cultural relevance? A) Ensuring it aligns with current trends B) Making sure it's accessible to all students C) Reflecting the diverse backgrounds of students D) Avoiding resources that are too complex 3. Which key aspect determines the accessibility of an ICT resource? A) How popular the resource is with students B) Its compatibility with existing technology C) Cost of using the resource D) Engagement levels it provides 4. In assessing content quality, why is accuracy important? A) To make resources easier to use B) To ensure alignment with curriculum standards C) To enhance visual appeal D) To provide a more engaging experience 5. Why is it essential for an ICT resource to offer interactivity? A) To improve download speeds B) To promote active learning and engagement C) To meet all technical requirements D) To minimize costs associated with the resource 6. What should be assessed regarding the usability of an ICT resource? A) How much it costs compared to other resources B) How easily students can navigate and use it C) How interactive it is D) Its level of engagement 7. Which of the following best describes the importance of feedback mechanisms in ICT resources? A) They reduce the need for grading B) They allow for automatic updates C) They provide immediate feedback to enhance learning D) They increase the cost-effectiveness of the resource 8. What is an advantage of resources that are scalable and flexible? A) They can adapt to different class sizes or teaching methods B) They are often free C) They do not require technical support D) They are easier to assess 9. Which tool would you use to gain structured feedback from students about an ICT resource? A) Rubrics B) Peer reviews C) Online review platforms D) Student feedback 10. When is a checklist most beneficial in evaluating an ICT resource? A) To provide structured guidelines for scoring B) For highlighting key features and requirements C) To measure student engagement D) To analyze technical support needs 11. Which of these tools helps teachers gather insights from colleagues on a resource's effectiveness? A) Online review platforms B) Student feedback C) Peer review D) Rubrics 12. In the planning stage, how can ICT benefit lesson development? A) By providing only audio resources B) By assisting in research for updated content C) By reducing the need for lesson objectives D) By limiting content access 13. During content delivery, how does ICT enhance the lesson experience? A) By allowing remote control of student devices B) By adding interactivity and visual elements C) By only focusing on text-based resources D) By limiting engagement 14. What is a key advantage of using ICT-based assessment tools? A) Reducing the need for reflection B) Tracking student progress and providing feedback C) Replacing lesson objectives D) Focusing solely on multiple-choice questions 15. Which ICT feature is most beneficial in the reflection stage of a lesson? A) Technical support options B) Feedback mechanisms for immediate assessment C) Tools for students to document learning, like online portfolios D) Interactive quizzes 16. How does ICT aid in skill development? A) By encouraging only memorization B) By fostering digital literacy and critical thinking C) By minimizing interactions with the teacher D) By restricting content variety 17. What does a cost-effective ICT resource entail? A) Being free of charge for all students B) Offering a good balance of educational value and cost C) Having the most features available D) Minimizing interactivity to reduce expenses 18. Why is teacher training crucial in ICT integration? A) To learn troubleshooting for technical issues B) To help only in the planning stage C) To reduce the need for ICT support D) To assess the cultural relevance of ICT tools 19. What challenge might schools face in accessing ICT resources? A) Lack of teacher motivation B) Availability of devices and internet connectivity C) High levels of student engagement D) Excessive interactivity 20. Why should teachers regularly evaluate the ICT resources they use? A) To determine if students enjoy using them B) To assess cost-effectiveness only C) To ensure resources remain effective and up-to-date D) To simplify lesson planning

“There’s No Such Thing as Sound Science” by By Christie Aschwanden was a lead science writer for FiveThirtyEight. FiveThirtyEight, Science, Dec. 6, 2017 Science is being turned against itself. For decades, its twin ideals of transparency and rigor have been weaponized by those who disagree with results produced by the scientific method. Under the Trump administration, that fight has ramped up again. In a move ostensibly meant to reduce conflicts of interest, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt has removed a number of scientists from advisory panels and replaced some of them with representatives from industries that the agency regulates. Like many in the Trump administration, Pruitt has also cast doubt on the reliability of climate science. For instance, in an interview with CNBC, Pruitt said that “measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do.” Similarly, Trump’s pick to head NASA, an agency that oversees a large portion the nation’s climate research, has insisted that research into human influence on climate lacks certainty, and he falsely claimed that “global temperatures stopped rising 10 years ago.” Kathleen Hartnett White, Trump’s nominee to head the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in a Senate hearing last month that she thinks we “need to have more precise explanations of the human role and the natural role” in climate change. The same entreaties crop up again and again: We need to root out conflicts. We need more precise evidence. What makes these arguments so powerful is that they sound quite similar to the points raised by proponents of a very different call for change that’s coming from within science. This other movement strives to produce more robust, reproducible findings. Despite having dissimilar goals, the two forces espouse principles that look surprisingly alike: Science needs to be transparent. Results and methods should be openly shared so that outside researchers can independently reproduce and validate them. The methods used to collect and analyze data should be rigorous and clear, and conclusions must be supported by evidence. These are the arguments underlying an “open science” reform movement that was created, in part, as a response to a “reproducibility crisis” that has struck some fields of science.1 But they’re also used as talking points by politicians who are working to make it more difficult for the EPA and other federal agencies to use science in their regulatory decision-making, under the guise of basing policy on “sound science.” Science’s virtues are being wielded against it. What distinguishes the two calls for transparency is intent: Whereas the “open science” movement aims to make science more reliable, reproducible and robust, proponents of “sound science” have historically worked to amplify uncertainty, create doubt and undermine scientific discoveries that threaten their interests. “Our criticisms are founded in a confidence in science,” said Steven Goodman, co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford and a proponent of open science. “That’s a fundamental difference — we’re critiquing science to make it better. Others are critiquing it to devalue the approach itself.” Calls to base public policy on “sound science” seem unassailable if you don’t know the term’s history. The phrase was adopted by the tobacco industry in the 1990s to counteract mounting evidence linking secondhand smoke to cancer. A 1992 Environmental Protection Agency report identified secondhand smoke as a human carcinogen, and Philip Morris responded by launching an initiative to promote what it called “sound science.” In an internal memo, Philip Morris vice president of corporate affairs Ellen Merlo wrote that the program was designed to “discredit the EPA report,” “prevent states and cities, as well as businesses from passing smoking bans” and “proactively” pass legislation to help their cause. The sound science tactic exploits a fundamental feature of the scientific process: Science does not produce absolute certainty. Contrary to how it’s sometimes represented to the public, science is not a magic wand that turns everything it touches to truth. Instead, it’s a process of uncertainty reduction, much like a game of 20 Questions. Any given study can rarely answer more than one question at a time, and each study usually raises a bunch of new questions in the process of answering old ones. “Science is a process rather than an answer,” said psychologist Alison Ledgerwood of the University of California, Davis. Every answer is provisional and subject to change in the face of new evidence. It’s not entirely correct to say that “this study proves this fact,” Ledgerwood said. “We should be talking instead about how science increases or decreases our confidence in something.” The tobacco industry’s brilliant tactic was to turn this baked-in uncertainty against the scientific enterprise itself. While insisting that they merely wanted to ensure that public policy was based on sound science, tobacco companies defined the term in a way that ensured that no science could ever be sound enough. The only sound science was certain science, which is an impossible standard to achieve. “Doubt is our product,” wrote one employee of the Brown & Williamson tobacco company in a 1969 internal memo. The note went on to say that doubt “is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’” and “establishing a controversy.” These strategies for undermining inconvenient science were so effective that they’ve served as a sort of playbook for industry interests ever since, said Stanford University science historian Robert Proctor. The sound science push is no longer just Philip Morris sowing doubt about the links between cigarettes and cancer. It’s also a 1998 action plan by the American Petroleum Institute, Chevron and Exxon Mobil to “install uncertainty” about the link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. It’s industry-funded groups’ late-1990s effort to question the science the EPA was using to set fine-particle-pollution air-quality standards that the industry didn’t want. And then there was the more recent effort by Dow Chemical to insist on more scientific certainty before banning a pesticide that the EPA’s scientists had deemed risky to children. Now comes a move by the Trump administration’s EPA to repeal a 2015 rule on wetlands protection by disregarding particular studies. (To name just a few examples.) Doubt merchants aren’t pushing for knowledge, they’re practicing what Proctor has dubbed “agnogenesis” — the intentional manufacture of ignorance. This ignorance isn’t simply the absence of knowing something; it’s a lack of comprehension deliberately created by agents who don’t want you to know, Proctor said.2 In the hands of doubt-makers, transparency becomes a rhetorical move. “It’s really difficult as a scientist or policy maker to make a stand against transparency and openness, because well, who would be against it?” said Karen Levy, researcher on information science at Cornell University. But at the same time, “you can couch everything in the language of transparency and it becomes a powerful weapon.” For instance, when the EPA was preparing to set new limits on particulate pollution in the 1990s, industry groups pushed back against the research and demanded access to primary data (including records that researchers had promised participants would remain confidential) and a reanalysis of the evidence. Their calls succeeded and a new analysis was performed. The reanalysis essentially confirmed the original conclusions, but the process of conducting it delayed the implementation of regulations and cost researchers time and money. Delay is a time-tested strategy. “Gridlock is the greatest friend a global warming skeptic has,” said Marc Morano, a prominent critic of global warming research and the executive director of ClimateDepot.com, in the documentary “Merchants of Doubt” (based on the book by the same name). Morano’s site is a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which has received funding from the oil and gas industry. “We’re the negative force. We’re just trying to stop stuff.” Some of these ploys are getting a fresh boost from Congress. The Data Quality Act (also known as the Information Quality Act) was reportedly written by an industry lobbyist and quietly passed as part of an appropriations bill in 2000. The rule mandates that federal agencies ensure the “quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information” that they disseminate, though it does little to define what these terms mean. The law also provides a mechanism for citizens and groups to challenge information that they deem inaccurate, including science that they disagree with. “It was passed in this very quiet way with no explicit debate about it — that should tell you a lot about the real goals,” Levy said. But what’s most telling about the Data Quality Act is how it’s been used, Levy said. A 2004 Washington Post analysis found that in the 20 months following its implementation, the act was repeatedly used by industry groups to push back against proposed regulations and bog down the decision-making process. Instead of deploying transparency as a fundamental principle that applies to all science, these interests have used transparency as a weapon to attack very particular findings that they would like to eradicate. Now Congress is considering another way to legislate how science is used. The Honest Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas,3 is another example of what Levy calls a “Trojan horse” law that uses the language of transparency as a cover to achieve other political goals. Smith’s legislation would severely limit the kind of evidence the EPA could use for decision-making. Only studies whose raw data and computer codes were publicly available would be allowed for consideration. That might sound perfectly reasonable, and in many cases it is, Goodman said. But sometimes there are good reasons why researchers can’t conform to these rules, like when the data contains confidential or sensitive medical information.4 Critics, which include more than a dozen scientific organizations, argue that, in practice, the rules would prevent many studies from being considered in EPA reviews.5 It might seem like an easy task to sort good science from bad, but in reality it’s not so simple. “There’s a misplaced idea that we can definitively distinguish the good from the not-good science, but it’s all a matter of degree,” said Brian Nosek, executive director of the Center for Open Science. “There is no perfect study.” Requiring regulators to wait until they have (nonexistent) perfect evidence is essentially “a way of saying, ‘We don’t want to use evidence for our decision-making,’” Nosek said. Most scientific controversies aren’t about science at all, and once the sides are drawn, more data is unlikely to bring opponents into agreement. Michael Carolan, who researches the sociology of technology and scientific knowledge at Colorado State University, wrote in a 2008 paper about why objective knowledge is not enough to resolve environmental controversies. “While these controversies may appear on the surface to rest on disputed questions of fact, beneath often reside differing positions of value; values that can give shape to differing understandings of what ‘the facts’ are.” What’s needed in these cases isn’t more or better science, but mechanisms to bring those hidden values to the forefront of the discussion so that they can be debated transparently. “As long as we continue down this unabashedly naive road about what science is, and what it is capable of doing, we will continue to fail to reach any sort of meaningful consensus on these matters,” Carolan writes. The dispute over tobacco was never about the science of cigarettes’ link to cancer. It was about whether companies have the right to sell dangerous products and, if so, what obligations they have to the consumers who purchased them. Similarly, the debate over climate change isn’t about whether our planet is heating, but about how much responsibility each country and person bears for stopping it. While researching her book “Merchants of Doubt,” science historian Naomi Oreskes found that some of the same people who were defending the tobacco industry as scientific experts were also receiving industry money to deny the role of human activity in global warming. What these issues had in common, she realized, was that they all involved the need for government action. “None of this is about the science. All of this is a political debate about the role of government,” she said in the documentary. These controversies are really about values, not scientific facts, and acknowledging that would allow us to have more truthful and productive debates. What would that look like in practice? Instead of cherry-picking evidence to support a particular view (and insisting that the science points to a desired action), the various sides could lay out the values they are using to assess the evidence. For instance, in Europe, many decisions are guided by the precautionary principle — a system that values caution in the face of uncertainty and says that when the risks are unclear, it should be up to industries to show that their products and processes are not harmful, rather than requiring the government to prove that they are harmful before they can be regulated. By contrast, U.S. agencies tend to wait for strong evidence of harm before issuing regulations. Both approaches have critics, but the difference between them comes down to priorities: Is it better to exercise caution at the risk of burdening companies and perhaps the economy, or is it more important to avoid potential economic downsides even if it means that sometimes a harmful product or industrial process goes unregulated? In other words, under what circumstances do we agree to act on a risk? How certain do we need to be that the risk is real, and how many people would need to be at risk, and how costly is it to reduce that risk? Those are moral questions, not scientific ones, and openly discussing and identifying these kinds of judgment calls would lead to a more honest debate. Science matters, and we need to do it as rigorously as possible. But science can’t tell us how risky is too risky to allow products like cigarettes or potentially harmful pesticides to be sold — those are value judgements that only humans can make.

Earth's History. All the processes that have been discussed require long periods of time to create a noticeable change on Earth's surface. You can just imagine how long it would take to create an oceanS as vast as the Pacific Ocean if the ocean floor moves only at about 10 cm/year. It is then important to know the history of Earth to learn the complexities of its past and be able to use it to understand the present. Just like learning the history of a country that requires one to read a lot of books, learning the history of Earth involves studying a lot of rocks. Rocks, especially sedimentary rocks, contain a lot of information about Earth's past. It holds the key to most of the geologic processes that happened on Earth and the key to uncovering how life on Earth evolved. But these discoveries are worthless if there is no time perspective. Thus, one of the most important contributions of geologists to mankind is the geologic time scale, which holds a history that is exceedingly long.The geologic time scale divides the history of Earth into different blocks of time by using relative dating. Since geologists use rocks to understand Earth's history, dating does not give accurate numerical dates, it only tells that an event preceded the relative dating places these rocks in their proper sequence of formation. But relative other. This method is still widely used today, alongside a more accurate method called absolute dating, which uses radioactive elements. With relative and absolute dating. geologists can trace the history of Earth. Relative Dating. Relative dating requires one to know the basic principles such as law of super-position, principle of original horizontality, principle of cross-cutting relationships, and unconformities.Law of Superposition The law of superposition is the most basic principle in relative dating. It states that in an undeformed sequence of sedimentary rock, the layers found at the top are the youngest rocks and the layers at the bottom are the oldest. It may seem too obvious, but this principle has only been clearly stated in 1669 by the Danish anatomist, geologist, and priest, Nicolaus Steno. Principle of Original Horizontality Along with the law of superposition, Steno stated that an undeformed sequence is the one where the layers are still in a horizontal position. This follows the principle of original horizontality, which states that sediments are deposited horizontally. Principle of Cross-Cutting Relationships The principle of cross-cutting relationships determines which events occurred first depending on which rocks are affected. The geologic layer that cuts another is younger than the layer it cuts across.Unconformities Rock layers that have not been interrupted are considered conformable. These sites represent spans of geologic time. But there is no place on Earth that has a complete conformable stratum since external and internal processes have always interrupted the deposition of the sediments. These breaks in the record of the rock strata are called unconformities. Using unconformities, geologic events are determined. There are three basic types of unconformities angular unconformity, disconformity, and nonconformity. Angular unconformity is characterized by having tilted or folded sedimentary rocks below younger, horizontal layers of rock. Disconformity is determined where there are missing parallel rock layers. Erosion takes place and removes the younger top layers and then deposition would once again happen. Nonconformity is characterized by an igneous or metamorphic rock found below a sedimentary rock. Figure 3-13. Three basic types of unconformities Using these principles for relative dating, one can determine the order of events However, relative dating does not give a time element as to when they happened. Absolute Dating For a much more accurate method of determining the history of Earth, geologists make use of absolute dating. This method uses unstable elements to determine the exact age of rocks. Isotopes are elements that have the same number of protons but different number of neutrons. Most isotopes are stable but some may be unstable. This is because the forces that bind the protons and neutrons in the nucleus of the isotope are not strong enough to hold them together, resulting in a radioactive decay, The unstable isotopes are called radioactive isotopes or parent isotopes. When these parent isotopes undergo radioactive decay, new isotopes, known as daughter products, are formed. The time it takes for one-half of the nuclei in the sample to decay is called half-life. This amount of time is fixed for each kind of radioactive isotope no matter what physical conditions it is subjected to. The ratio of parent daughter isotope determines how many half-lives have passed. If it is 1:1, then one half-life has passed; if it is 1:3, then two half-lives have passed; and if 1:7, then three half-lives have passed, and so on. Therefore, using the concept of half-life and parent-daughter ratio, geologists can determine the exact age of the sample. This method is called radiometric dating. It uses five radioactive isotopes to determine the age of rocks. For dating rocks that are about a million years old, rubidium-87, thorium-232, and the two isotopes of uranium (U-238 and U-235) are used. The fifth radioactive isotope is potassium-40, which has a half-life of 1.3 billion years. With these radioactive elements, determining the accurate age of rocks becomes easier. For dating events that are more recent, radiocarbon dating is used. This method uses carbon-14. Carbon-14 has a half-life of 5730 years and can be used to date back events up to 75000 years. All organisms contain a small amount of carbon-14, which is proportional with the amount of carbon-12. When an organism dies, the carbon-14 decays and is no longer replaced. The amount of carbon-14 left in the sample is then compared to the amounts of carbon-12 present, and radiocarbon dates can then be determined. This method has been particularly useful for anthropologists, archeologists, historians, and geologists for events that are much more recent.Fossils Aside from rocks, geologists also use the remains of living organisms in understanding Earth's history. Some fossils are formed from parts of an organism (body fossil), while some provide signs or clues as to which life-forms were present at that time (Frace fossils). Fossils contain a lot of information about the past the kind of organisms that have lived, the environment where organisms lived, and the evolution organisms underwent as their environment changed. However, not all organisms turned into fossils, therefore, scientists cannot learn everything about the past using fossils alone. There are also fossils that are used to determine the age of a rock. These are index fossils and these are only found in rocks of a particular age. The organisms that turned into index fossils have a relatively short life-spanning from a few million years to a few hundred million years. Index fossils are also found in most of the common rocks around the world, which makes them easier to identify.The methods used for dating the age of rocks are also used for fossils. Absolute dating is more commonly used since it can give exact numerical dates for the age, but relative dating can also be used to determine which fossils are older.

“On this night, we share a roof protecting us from fleets of inequity. Our unification promises a better tomorrow. Those larger than myself, sitting on their marble thrones, sipping blood from cups composed of human skin and singing songs of so-called virtue, grow weaker each moment. Their caravans are revolting. There is hope yet. There is progress! Though tonight may mark a countdown, it is still a celebration. Look at all we have done, not just for Trials but for Palatium Infra as a whole. In four years, when I’m no longer Sovereignty, the Spoiled Purity and his people will continue to strive. So drink! Smoke! Crush up those exotic plants and snort them! We will not falter, weaken, or wane. Our influence is expanding, and somebody new opens their eyes every day. Even the Silbys of Aculeus have reached alarming potentials despite their embittered minds. So long as you relish in tonight, dance, and pray to your “dead” Gods, our revolution shall rise beyond the bounds of class, and when I’m only a commoner, we shall rise again beyond our brainwashed adversaries! Cheers, my people. Cheers!” Followers raised their cups. Some clinked theirs together. Others stood still and screamed breathlessly in agreement. I smiled with courtesy, then stepped off my platform. My voice still rang across the cellar. Speeches before were grander. Those displays were supposed to be emptying, and yet this one left me bloated, swollen tight. I watched as they popped the corks of their bottles and chanted in the name of Purity. Maybe the quality of my words wasn’t what mattered to them anyway, so long as I screamed loud enough. There’s no merit in attacking your people, a voice corrected me. “That’s right,” I said aloud. “Knox, my-my Sovereign!” squealed a nearby devotee, jittering as he stuffed his face with catered pastries. He was one I’d never seen before or had failed to remember. “Look what I’ve found! It’s wine, and not the shoddy Infran kind, either. Earth-made with good fruit! I don’t know how anyone managed to get their hands on this. Maybe some space travel mischief.” He giggled and held up a small glass bottle. “How neat.” “I want you to have it, Sir.” I nodded my head. “Yes, of course. Thank you.” Backing off into the midst of rowdy disciples, I clutched the bottle. What a waste of grapes. It could have been jam instead. Earthly food had a superior taste, ripe with delicate intricacies and nostalgia, but Palatium Infra had mastered the art of alcohol. Why waste your time with a drunkenness so sad and sickening? The booze of trash. Not many more followers approached me. The barren peroration must have upset them. My hands itched to submerge into my suit pockets, and my legs stood suddenly numb, wobbling. Four more years until I’m nothing. But tonight, you are nothing. “Shut up,” I told myself. Tightly packed together in the corner of the dwelling sat the Sibyls. A mound of writhing fabric and tones of skin made up their unified silhouette. I snapped the strap of the nearest gown, balancing on my hands and knees, waving the bottle before them. In their almost rodent nature, narrow noses prodded my way. Their dresses wrinkled and fell to their ankles. Knees dropped, and eyes widened. Many grumbled at me like hungry she-beasts. Those newer ones with faded curtains for hair, sunken eyes, and dirtied nails looked, hid their face, then sobbed. I imagined them in a pack together, fighting wildly against the Spoiled Purity in their rat decorum–biting down with square teeth laced with rabies. “I’ve got you all something,” I said. “Go back off to your pedestal and yap some more. We don’t want it.” A woman rose from the pile and spat. “You don’t even know what it is yet. It's Earth hooch, or more likely a near-flawless replica. I figured you girls would also like a chance to enjoy yourselves tonight.” “Your playmates have been harassing us since the moment you hung the banners and opened the cellar door.” The youngest, with a striking cyan mop upon her head, uncoiled from the mass. What was she now? 20, 21? We celebrated a birthday recently, I thought as she spun around me. “I remember something about a promise. Multiple promises, actually. Are you trying to bribe us into just shutting up and taking it? Because if another sticky, 40-year-old, Earth-born virgin gropes my shoulder, I’m going to have an aneurysm!” the girl continued. “Why not an Infran follower? Do you like it when they touch you?” I returned her accusing tone. “I’m sorry, sweet prophets, that you feel I’ve neglected my duties. I’ll keep a better eye out. Remember, you can always just holler if somebody is bothering you. And Anwen, friend, if I’ve ever tried to bribe you with anything, it was certainly the hair dye. I mean, look at you! Such handsomeness!” I exclaimed. The other Siblys began to encircle her, uttering compliments or even announcements of their envy. Anwen disappeared in a wink with flushed cheeks back into the mound. “I’ll just leave this here.” Smiling, I set down the bottle. ** “141, 143. . .” I counted each step as I trekked the staircase. There was no doubt I lost track somewhere. The ledges kept spawning under my feet, infinitely multiplying until I wasn’t moving at all–swallowing me up in a whirlpool of stone. My tie still hung around my neck, and my blazer remained tied around my hips as a skirt. Streaks of red dribbled off from the cavity in my chest. It was a gorgeous marking, sensual to my fingertips as I traced its edges. Purity, oh, Purity. Purity and his wings of burnt skin. Purity and his many faces. Purity the spoiled. Purity the mutilated. The Silbys did not bother waiting for me. On bare feet, they stormed up the stairs to their room. A trail of red, though in paint unlike mine, streamed after them. None looked remotely near me as they squeaked and gossiped intangibly. I saved them, those Infran broads, enlightened them. As much as they liked to deny it, spit at me, and bask in the thought of their victimhood, in this home, they stood empowered. You’ve done well, my thoughts affirmed, though in the manner of an insincere commentator rather than a hype man. Teeth grace in tile violin goes laundry paper when. It dissolved into an intruding drivel. I rubbed my head and sniveled. “Do you need help, Knox?” called a Silby. Fattened by my coddling, her shadow fell upon me from the doorway steps ahead. I attempted counting again. There must’ve been at least another hundred between me and her. “I’m hallucinating some,” I said, breathing deeply to suppress a burp as I struggled to recall her name. Two syllables. Typically Latin, though sometimes English. Drops of slobber leaked from my mouth. “I’m hallucinating some, Tybal. Do you like your name, Tybal? I would have named you something better. Ty-Tyballinia. No, we’d have to eliminate the ‘ball’ aspect. It sounds too crude.” “One foot in front of the other,” she said. So I walked. Mess greeted me at the doorway. Dirtied culinary obscured the dark wooden countertops, and the sink lay running. I approached the kitchen table, sat, and set my face down upon its cool wooden surface. Assaulting my nose was the smell of neglected flowers, like soil mixed with the kind of sweet cough medicine that would have left me gagging as a child. Open windows whispered songs of the twilight hour through the vessels of busy trolleys and shooting guns. My mouth strained to vomit, but there was nothing in my stomach to regurgitate except the petals of Stulto’s bloom, which came out effortlessly in little sputters. Teetering, I stood up and brushed disgorged plant parts off the tabletop. “Love,” I said as I slogged up yet another staircase. “Are you awake?” She said she’d wait. Somebody’s gotten her. No, she always misses movie night. That sleepyhead, I assured myself. There was a stirring amidst the manor’s cloak of dusk. Portraits of myself, my wife, and my daughter turned to face me as the hallway lights flickered, escaping their quartz frames to penetrate my ears with nonsense. The taxidermied heads of Infran creatures bared their teeth. I stopped to stare at my favorite, an adabactor with daunting spiked tusks poking out from its forehead. Its nose remained black and sharp, and its eyes wide with malice. “Where is my Spes, Adaba-boy? Is she sleepy?” There’s someone in the house. The sounds of the stirring rose along with my blood pressure. Footsteps orbited around me, drawing near and far and then near again, little dancers in the dark. The carpet immersed me in its mass of purples and blues, leaving my skin stained indigo and my vision abstracted. I toiled to reach the master bedroom across the aisle as it stretched out to me with bright lights and celestial howling, like a dove struggling in a pool of oil. Never again with Stulto’s bloom. Never again on what was already a bad night. My hand brushed the doorknob, and the high abruptly faded into only a persistent hum-buzz twirling around my brain. The portraits returned to their typical depression–Spes posing with her ax, Ari’s school photo, and myself in the cap I wore when addressing the military with the Verbis emblem embroidered in its center. All lifeless shots. Who were they for when they captured not the subject’s essence but only some fragment of their identity? They used to feel personal, not advertisements of some supposed characters. Servants, babysitters, and likewise civilian guests, I reminded myself, mustn’t forget whose home they’re in. Yet my body moved independently, taking Ari’s from its hook and laying it backward against the wall to hide her distant grin and tamed posture. It was time for new pictures. Sweet ones, real ones; time was ticking. I approached my own when the stirring began again. Groans and squeals erupted from the vents as if someone had set a pen of pigs loose in my crawlspace. No, not the crawlspace, my bedroom door. I turned the ruby knob. Underneath a blanket wrestled my two squealing piglets, their skins melting together beneath the layer of duvet. Fishnet leggings and manicured nails outstretched and scraped at the sheet beneath them. One raised its head, a salmon-colored man with sweat running down his forehead. Through the crack in the door, we met eyes, his Infran Dr. Sesuss nose flaring its narrow nostrils. No mark of the Spoiled Purity existed carved onto his naked body. My chest felt tight. I stepped back. I was suffocating. Spes emerged from the linens, her hair flowing down her back and her dark skin glistening in front of the bedroom window. She giggled and held the man, the blanket falling and revealing inches of her body I had not seen in months. “Darling,” whispered the rosy-faced man, “look.” He was unfathomably ugly and grotesquely young, with beady, lifeless pupils that dilated when he faced me. The excess flesh on his face sagged while he bit down on his thin lips. My wife faced me, gasped, and strained to cover herself. Suddenly, I was a stranger. A small child who had walked into his parents having sex. I unfurled the door completely. “Get out of my house,” I said. The man stayed in place. “Get out of my house,” I repeated. “Knox,” Spes began. Tears ran down her round cheeks. “Shut up!” I turned to the man, picking up a marble trophy from on top of my dresser. “Get out of my house! I’ll kill you!” “Knox!” Spes sobbed. “God damn it! I hate you! You barely look at me. Every day, there’s less passion. God, God, God, I don’t want to fuck a dead man!” she screamed, “You get out! Get! Get!” My hands wrapped tighter around the statue. That pig of a man was attached to her at the side, his face equipped with a scowl that challenged mine. He thought I was weak; frail like a decaying dementia-ridden senior. I imagined his skull bashed in, his scowl gone, and the feist and confidence in his face beaten into numbness. A new portrait was in order of such brutality, him as a splintered slab of wood, rashed and beaten, a carcass licking my boot. The churning in my brain had come back. Every wall shook. Clock faces came to life and rang in alarm. Indescribable noises caressed my eardrum before breaking into sorrowful weeps. Was it my own? I stared at Spes in motionless frenzy, clenched my teeth, and screamed like a siren. Passionless. What a lie! An excuse, more like. One that erased all my ventures, reducing me to a nobody. But I was not a nobody. I thought of my sect, my campaigns, my endurance through the political brutality of my empty hive-mind world–even my collection of literature, maps, and artifacts. I thought of daring nights alone with Spes when we were young, ravaging each other, two sardonic eggheads suddenly overcome with desire. The veins in my neck throbbed as I gasped for air. It was all I had. I threw the figurine at the man’s head. Eye shut, I heard the thud. A million singing voices of victory flooded out of the cracks in the floorboard. Proving myself a man to the woman I loved in a display of fervent violence was passion. I strained my ears for his cries, though I did not look yet. There had to be a pause, a moment of relief, where I stood tall as a skyscraper and seemingly fought to stay contained in front of my wife and her wounded, quivering paramour. Frantic footsteps rushed off the bed and past my side. I turned and grappled against myself to seize my wife’s shoulder. “Spes!” My eyelids lifted. Escaping was the man with that same numb expression in which I had imagined him. “You’re insane,” he said. I swiveled back towards the bed. With her curly locks flowing over her breasts and her limbs bent at her sides, Spes sat limp pressed against the headboard, her forehead bludgeoned and the statue resting on her stomach. Lips pursed and sweet, my Renaissance beauty reclined there in the guise of a squashed bug. But she was not dead. The desk ornament I flung was only the size of my shoe. Spes, that dramatist, may have been slightly hurt but was far from dead. She only wanted me to think she was to observe me at my most distraught, like a leech feeding on misery. “Get up.” Staggering toward the bed, I said. “You wanted passion? I showed you passion. ‘Shoved it right into your head. Of course, we both know who that gesture was meant for. . .” I fumbled to find my wit. Cold skin met my hands as I stroked her face, unable to resist checking her pulse, even though she was not dead. “I love you, Spes,” I said. Rain pelted against a nearby window. “Spes, please. Please.” No vibration answered my plea. I lifted my hand, sitting next to her now. Tears did not come. There was not any blood on the trophy, but when I picked it up, it felt to be now only a cruel instrument. It depicted a younger me in white marble, with my glasses and collared shirt being the only things painted. Both were in pink. It was a favorable color. I scrambled from the bed to vomit pure digestive bile on the rug. My stomach heaved. I ran my nails along every piece of myself I saw, a dog chasing my tail. As I slammed myself against walls and convulsed, my own heart grew ever louder in my chest. “Dad? I heard–” Ari’s slippered feet hammered across the floor. “Mom? Mom?” I kept my eyes on the storm. Silence fell. “She-She isn’t—your—.” Gasps interrupted every syllable she spoke. “You’re a murderer. Bad. Like they said,” she breathed, “ You beat her!” The words became mush, alphabet soup. Ari ran back down the hall. “My-My mom is dead. . . .Yes. . . Manor of the Trials Sovereignty. . .Ari Sorkin. . . I’m afraid he’s going to hurt me,” she said, presumably over the phone. It was all too fast. I crawled onto the windowsill, opened the glass, and let myself plummet into the alley below. Gusts of wind howled. The lack of motion or sensation informed me I had passed and again lived. Another Palatium Infra, another strange planet in which the celestial endowed rotting men with the opportunity to inhabit. Was this it? Was it all just an impossible limbo of galactic traveling? My surroundings were overwhelmingly gray, an abyss of clouds. Perhaps I had now met the real coming world, and my family and old friends lived here, ready to rush to my sides, lift me up, and jump for joy. Spes would be there. She would be enraged, but at least she’d be there. You are a bad man. You are a bad man. My eyelashes fluttered. There was a tugging sensation in my leg. The fog was wavering along with my ascendance. “No,” I yearned, trying to grip the clouds and stick them in place. “Stay with me.” But the peace was fleeting. I felt the cement under me and the moist garments clinging to my figure. My leg burned. Carefully, I craned my neck, only to observe the promenade as my surroundings. The most underwhelming of filth and danger, individually Infran. Forever my coming world. What a fool I was, having forgotten my blessing. Those idiot Gods could not tell the difference between assassination and self-infliction; a faulty insurance plan. The urge to cry at last set over me, and so I sat and wailed hot salvia into my palm, shielding my mouth to muffle the noise. Thunder echoed my hushed howling. Raindrops turned to pebbles. Under the ambiance of the stormy night, I could have sworn I heard troops stomping, guns cocking, and the chanting of my name. They had all been waiting for this. Billboards came to life, and I could only sit and spectate as the scenery flashed red. I inhaled fear and sobriety through runny nostrils. “Trials Sovereign Vsevolod “Knox” Sorkin is currently at large for the suspected homicide of Spes Sorkin, breaking the first term of the Sovereignty Charter. We now instruct you to report any sightings of the Earth-born, caucasian, roughly 195 centimeters tall, brown-haired, and brown-eyed man to your local Guard post. One can identify the suspected convict specifically by an occult tattoo of Purity’s Coronet on his lower back. No attempted execution or elongated punishment will take place until our Guards conduct an autopsy proving his guilt, per Life’s 1238 commandment. We cannot be sure when or if the Gods will revoke his blessing. Remember, when Gods frown upon strife, opt for a peaceful life. We permit all grieving festivities until Cagidus 4th. Good year!” towering buildings sang out in broadcast, repeating that same convoluted message quicker the instant it ended. Sometimes, the announcer spoke in Latin for the Infran children, other times in Chinese, Hindi, or Spanish to cater to those of irrelevant tongues. You aren’t a bad man. You are a stupid boy. Puddles sloshed. Somebody was approaching. I didn’t dare waste any remaining energy avoiding the Guards and their prodding blades. How did that phrase go? You dug your grave. Now lie in it. And so I embraced the cement. “Knox?” said the Guard. No, her tone was too sincere, and no authority would proceed in such a manner. There wasn’t confirmation on whether or not I was armed, and it wasn’t as if she could shoot me first. She was a partygoer, having just left from the cellar’s backdoor. I shooed her away with my hand. She hovered, and I discerned her shadow hesitating over my body. A man could not rot in peace. “Come on, get up! They’re after you!” Hands reached around my torso, struggling to handle my weight as they urged me onto my feet. That leg, the burning one, my right, trembled and bent unnaturally upon impact with the ground. The partygoer slung my arm over her shoulder, balancing me. My eyes caught a glimpse of a cyan mop. “Anwen?” I rasped, “hu-who let you out?” Keys jangled in her hands–my keys. “I escaped,” she said casually, coercing me to walk beside her. “Quicken your pace. I just heard somebody on your front porch. ‘You see that compost bin down the alley? We’re gonna burrow right down into the depth of that. If they open it and uncover us, I’ll be on top, and I can hide you and act like I’m just a homeless amica trying to take a nap.” With a tightening grip, she led me like livestock to the stinking crate. “I don’t understand, Anwen,” I said. “They’re going to torture and kill you, stupid. You know they’ve been wanting to, and you just handed the opportunity to them!” “I understand that.” It was becoming increasingly challenging to hide the fragility emerging in my voice. “You said you were escaping. Why stop and help your captor?” “What else could I do? Leave you there?” Attempts to shove my wounded body inside its mass of discarded fruits and vegetables began. She yanked down upon my head and submerged me in the fertilizer sea. The evidence grows indisputable, I thought as I stared at the abruptly humane Infran girl, diving in after me, that I belong here. “Damn me to hell! I’ve killed her! My love is dead!” an uncontrollable cry leaped from my mouth. “Shut up! Soon you’ll be, too, if you don’t quiet down.” The actual noise of the Guards darted past us: disorientated marching, guns clanking against each other, cluttered belts rattling, the Latin squawking. One paused to open the bin’s lid, though only rummaged through the surface layer of peat before carrying on. “What are they talking about? I struggle with my Latin,” I whispered. “The search, mainly.” Aggression remained firey in Anwen’s clenched jaw. Though she sat on top of me, there was a monumental distance between our rain-soaked forms. I curled up into a ball, ducked my head between my knees, and dreamt of Spes, ignoring the stench of spoiled food rising from every crevice of my dwelling. The next coming world was due to adopt me again as I forced sleep. I prayed for a canyon of fluffy haze, where I waltzed with pale memories but found nothing but the petrifying stillness of my mind. Killed and ran. Violent as a Guard just to prove a point and watch it backfire. Why would any heaven want to welcome me? I clung to the picture of Spes in my head like it was the last ember of an extinguished flame. “Did you mean to kill her?” Anwen interrogated. “Someone like you would immutably believe yes.” “And who is someone like me? You can’t even treat me like a person for a moment, can you?” grating drama decorated her words. “You know my opinions. I have not seen much of your or your breed’s faces besides that of cruelty and ignorance.” I retorted. “I just saved you! Does that make me cruel and ignorant?” “It makes you an idiot, which is another word for somebody ignorant.” “And why am I an idiot?” She asked. “Because you helping me does no good. Thank you anyhow. Now, do yourself a favor and scram.” As she bent her leg in anticipation, preparing to strike me on the forehead, I sensed an invisible withdrawal widening the gap between us. “You never answered my question,” Anwen took me by the end of my tattered tie suddenly and started her game of shepherd and sheep over again, pulling me back up to the crate’s exit. It appeared as a shining light at the end of a maze of rubbish and mold. “No. Of course not. Spes was my everything,” I sniffled. “I knew it. You couldn’t even bring yourself to hit us, let alone murder your wife. The girls and I always figured you were sensitive.” My heart rate quickened. Today was one of humbling and misery–one to pray a hail spike would fall from the sky as sharp as a needle, pierce into my eyelid, and lobotomize me. I wished I could have merely died or hit my head hard enough not to have to deal with it all. No, I wished I was Anwen with her snarky, careless glow and lack of depth in her eyes. As we emerged from the compost bin together, I fantasized about strangling her until her face turned purple, her weakening spirit no longer categorizing me as “sensitive”, but the thought could only remind me of wielding that trophy and the microscopic traces of my wife’s tender skin tainting it, which turned my guts inside out. “That’s why I think you could use a little help,” Anwen said, “It seems like you can’t walk, either. Your leg is all twisted up.” She undid one of her trim pigtails and handed me the band. “Take off your tie and put up your hair. ‘Will make you less recognizable. Then swallow your pride and stick with me.”

Related quizzes

Related quizzes