Best geography books according to redditors
We found 94 Reddit comments discussing the best geography books. We ranked the 59 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
We found 94 Reddit comments discussing the best geography books. We ranked the 59 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
On mobile but this is copied and pasted from a comment I made awhile back.
Most of my personal R code for spatial analysis is largely uncommented but I will share some resources I base a lot it off of.
Books:
Websites:
Rpubs:
Python:
Edit: I used to work in public health academia so the links are geared towards that field.
Your proclivity for discussing black pathologies and large scale civil unrest without proper context makes me call your intellectual honesty into question.
Here is a link of a thread I began on the root causes of the unrest in Ferguson and throughout US history. I'm genuinely curious to hear your responses. Given the tone and misrepresentations prevalent in your post, it seems like you're more interested in circle jerking in an echo chamber. I'm willing to be proven wrong though.
The first programming-related thing a company would look for in a candidate for a purely GIS job is Python, no doubt. Especially if you're brand new to programming, start with Python. If you're proficient in ArcGIS already, I recommend this book. You can also start with the easy online tutorials like Korlyth mentioned, but remember that you won't truly learn Python unless you apply it. Come up with a project and practice using your new skills. Then, if an employer asks for a portfolio, you have some good examples to share! A good example would be to analyze a large Excel file, import that data into ArcGIS, make some shapefiles from the data, and then maybe run some spatial analysis on those shapefiles-- ALL within your Python script (you don't even have to open ArcMap!). The big advantage is using Python for automation of repetitive tasks. It's tedious to do some analysis for all the individual counties in a state by hand, but you could practice doing this analysis in a script.
After that, I recommend learning some geospatial R. More and more organizations are starting to use R, and it can be helpful to learn some languages/packages that are not strictly used by ArcGIS. I recommend this book.
SQL might be good to learn since GIS tends to be all about databases. It might be tough to learn if you don't already have a huge database/server to work with, but try to learn what you can. I feel like Python, R, and SQL cover a lot of the non-web aspects of GIS programming.
If you want to take it to the next level, then you could learn some web-based programming. It can be tricky to learn this because there are several languages that work together (ex. HTML puts the content on the web page, CSS edits the content to make it look nice, and JavaScript manipulates the behavior of the content). You could start by building a basic web page (non-GIS) so you can learn these languages individually. Once you have a better idea about syntax and how they work together, you could move to GIS stuff. You could start by using a pre-existing web map service such as CartoDB and using HTML, CSS, JavaScript, etc. to put the web map on your own website and edit it.
For one, race isn't genetic, it's socially constructed. Hereditary traits are not race. The reason that this is the case is that race is seen and treated drastically differently in various countries (e.g. compare Brazil to the U.S. and its immensely different), and racism and race relations divided along lines of white and black developed with the discovery of the Americas by Europeans. Race as a concept is 100% arbitrary with no scientific backing and no possible genetic or biological backing. Saying otherwise is to give false statements from a position of having no understanding of human biology and anatomy. Reference
For two, correlation is not causation. The more likely cause for IQ correlating with race is the material conditions that various racial groups have been subjected to. For instance, in the U.S., black people were the most heavily effected by systemic race-based slavery, and were the only group to ever experience ghettoization in America, which lasted for decades, with effects still seen today. Black people were continuously subjected to worse living conditions, establishing poverty related issues such as lead poisoning from outdated housing infrastructure, poor education from bad school systems, etc. Reference
For three, White Supremacism can take more forms than just Nazism, gas chambers, and slave plantations. Sports being comprised of mostly black players was not the case in the early-mid 20th century. This is why, for instance, Jackie Robinson was extremely controversial. Most sports were played by almost exclusively white people. Furthermore, sports having such a disproportionate prominence of black players is still evidence of racism and white supremacist cultural norms as it now has foundations in associating blackness with physical prowess -- i.e. associating hyper-masculinity with blackness -- and for many players was and is viewed as their way of getting out of poverty. Because of the poverty conditions many black communities experience, many children of marginalized racial minorities often end up associating with a "star script", regardless of the realistic likelihood of achieving the career they want (e.g. rapper, NBA player, etc.). Reference
Sailors of all types routinely sailed all over the world. If you want to read a great book on the subject try "Two Years Before The Mast". It's in the public domain so it's free (I linked to the free kindle version, there are other versions on project Gutenberg, including epub).
> Its poverty post independence mostly came from having a huge influx of people from the, frankly, messy split that it simply could not deal with. It also didn't help that West Pakistan absorbed all the funding leaving very little for East Pakistan/Bangladesh.
India was not poor as a result of the independence campaign or by becoming independent. India was stagnating throughout colonial rule. Not a blip or anything, just consistent stagnation. In less than 3 years after independence annual growth in output went from less than 1% to more then 3%, with growth per capita increasingly significantly. This doesn't really fit in with your claim.
> It was inevitable that India's cottage industry was going to collapse.
What 'cottage industry'?
India had a huge financial surplus. It traded with Portugal, Netherlands, the UK and so on. It accounted for a disproportionate amount of world output. It wasn't some economic backwater.
> Ironically, had Britain been more iron fisted in India at the time, the famine would most likely have not happened.
So one famine might have been prevented? This book will tell you that India had more frequent famines under British rule than before, and as I said the last major famine was in 1943 which is when it was still a colony. A number of prominent British people at the time(Florence Nightingale, Sir James Caird and William Digby, for example), had beef with how famines were being dealt with.
>Britain was looking out for its people. There is noting wrong with that.
You mentioned 'basic economics' earlier. Basic economics teaches Ricardo's comparative advantage. Even more basic economics teaches Smith's absolute advantage. Protectionism is rarely a good thing.
You'd be surprised that today, it's rare to be black in an all-white neighborhood. Even education today is more segregated than it was in 1968 (the height of the civil rights movement).
"White flight" has resulted in all-minority neighborhoods in America. This results in less funding for local schools, lower property values, and fewer businesses wanting to establish themselves in low-income, racially segregated areas. This means that even grocery stores that sell fresh fruits and vegetables don't want to be in a low-income, high-minority neighborhood, limiting their access to healthful foods. Instead, they rely on the local corner store that doesn't even primarily sell food.
There isn't just an unequal standard of living, but also unequal access to opportunity. Your network (from family to your college alumni) can be so important when you're trying to find a job, but if you couldn't afford to go to college and your family has always been working class, you're already set up to have unequal opportunities compared to the kid whose parents are lawyers or doctors. Even if you look in the news today, you'll see instances of discrimination by banks, hiring managers, and federal regulations.
If you're really serious about learning more about why it's more difficult to be Black in America today, I urge you to pick up a book. Here are some of my suggestions:
American Apartheid by Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton
The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander
The Shame of the Nation by Jonathan Kozol
Sigh.
Anyone who throws there hands up and says "lolwut, itz too complicated i dunno!" is not a skeptic. Do you honestly think that climate scientists don't study natural phenomena like the ones on this list and try to understand their causes and implications? This post is especially pathetic, but it's literally just a list of natural phenomena; if you think think this stuff is what makes the climate complex, then you literally don't know anything about atmospheric science.
You might want to start with the following textbooks, which any climate scientist will have devoured by the time they have a Masters -
There are, of course, higher level textbooks on my shelf as well. The majority of the stuff on this list is basic stuff that an undergraduate would be exposed to. It doesn't even scratch the surface of what our science is actually about.
EDIT TO ADD -
For example, geostrophy is this list. Do you know what geostrophic motion is? It's motion where the only forces acting on a parcel are the Coriolis force and the pressure gradient force. How do you get to geostrophic motion? Well, on the first day of your Junior year as a meteorology student, you start taking Atmospheric Dynamics. Your professor throws Navier-Stokes on the board and says "This is what we need to solve to figure out how the atmosphere works." Then he mentions that there is a million dollar prize for working with that equation and says "okay, let's see if we can simplify things." After that, you spend a few lectures deriving atmospheric motion following Holton, Lindzen, or Serreze - talking about the Rossby radius, coordinate transformations, Eulerian vs. Lagrangian and material derivatives, and path integrals through moving reference frames.
Ultimately you re-derive equations of motion from scratch starting with F=ma, and arrive at a 3D set of equations where motion is determined by terms relating to the pressure gradient, accelerations, friction, gravity, and the Coriolis force. Then, you scale analyze the terms of the equations to see what the dominating terms are, given certain assumptions.
Assume you're above the PBL; then, friction is negligible. You'll immediately see that acceleration/velocity-related terms are an order of magnitude smaller than the other terms. Assume hydrostatic balance and there is no acceleration in the vertical, truncating your motion to two dimensions. You're left with a balance of forces in both your basis vectors - pressure gradient and coriolis. Balance these two and you can solve for a balanced flow called geostrophic flow. Geostrophic flow is super-simple and only really works as an approximation for upper-level flows with small curvature (i.e. you need features larger than the Rossby radius of deformation or else the assumptions about 2D velocity are invalid). But it's a great learning tool for meteorology students to get their hands dirty with the math, and derive from first principles why flow is counter-clockwise around Low Pressures in the northern hemisphere.
Relax some assumptions and you can also get gradient flow or cyclostrophic flow.
You can't do any meteorology with these flows, though - you need at least to relax geostrophy and derive quasi-geostrophy with the aid of the circulation and divergence theorems to actually get vertical motion which is diagnosable from thermodynamics and fluid dynamics.
Anything else from the domain of the atmospheric science that the skeptics here want explained? Now's your chance.
That is an entertaining read for sure! Check out this book if you are seriously considering a circumnav : How to Sail Around the World
You may not like the statistics, but that doesn't make them any less true. I highly recommend Risk, by John Adams, if you want to know more about humanity's bizarre inability to risk assess. ISBN 978-1857280685
Lee Kuan Yew, the late former leader of Singapore, talked a lot about geopolitics and the effect of China's rise in particular.
https://www.amazon.com/Lee-Kuan-Yew-Insights-International/dp/0262019124
I don't know much about this one but it looks interesting:
"Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives On and Beyond Asia (Politics in Asia)"
https://www.amazon.com/Non-Western-International-Relations-Theory-Perspectives/dp/0415474744
Man I just want to say that this is an incredibly white-washed view of modern racism. Throughout the course of American history, Black people have suffered from institutional racism that has barred their access to the voting process, property, land access, economic opportunity, social security access, veteran's rights, personal freedom, you name it. This continues into the modern day. These modern issues will not be fixed by colorblindness; instead, they can only be fixed through race conscious affirmative action.
Here are some great books if you want to get more informed on historical and modern racism, proper reactions to it, and why "colorblindness" is not an acceptable form of dealing with it:
This is the book I used in college for all my GIS courses. Highly recommend it.
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Statistical-Problem-Solving-Geography/dp/1478611197
Not sure if its from this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Risk-John-Adams/dp/1857280687
Certainly John Adams talks about very similar ideas to this whole issue (risk compensation: the idea that people try to achieve a certain level of risk, and if their world gets safer, then they take more risk to compensate). I read this book years ago, and found it completely fascinating.
No I definitely read my sources, I just could not afford to buy you a copy of the book "Race, Class, and Gender in the United States" by Paula Rothenburg. I've had that book assigned to me in 3 my classes, and my former academic advisor wrote a chapter in the newest edition of the book about internalized racism.
I read the New York Times whenever I get the chance since it is free to read on my blackberry.
I also am a higher education practitioner so I read the Chronicle of Higher Education everyday, which is where the article "Affirmative Action in Admissions: Right in Theory, Wrong in Practice" comes from. The chronicle requires that you have a subscription to view articles from them so that's why I included some seemingly obscure link. I was shocked to read the title of that article because the authors are very pro-affirmative action and it seems like they are anti-affirmative action, but I am fairly certain that this is not the case. Massey is a prominent sociologist and co-wrote Apartheid America (which was actually given to me by someone who went to school with Massey).I am fairly certain that the article "Affirmative Action in Admissions: Right in Theory, Wrong in Practice" is saying that affirmative action programs have the opportunity to work but they tend to stigmatize the people who are admitted. In other words they are theoretically beneficial but the way they are set up do not always encourage a positive response. Often times college campuses are ill-prepared to handle disadvantaged students, but thus is not really a reason to discontinue affirmative action, it's more of a reason to change the way you do things at higher education institutions to better serve underrepresented populations. If you pay attention to the article it also says that this is not very hard since athletes and legacies don't face stigmas. I am guessing you didn't read the last two paragraphs of the article:
>Our statistical analyses of the academic effects of affirmative action have produced results that challenge as much as reassure supporters of affirmative action in higher education. But the results of our research do not mean that affirmative action is necessarily detrimental to the academic interests of minority students and should be abandoned. Rather, the results imply that as currently administered by selective institutions, the application of race-sensitive admissions criteria appears to create a stigmatizing setting and should be reconsidered. Indeed, if the way affirmative action is administered and framed can be changed so as to mitigate the stigma now being created, its negative academic effects might disappear. ...In the end, our finding that affirmative-action programs can undermine grade performance by stigmatizing students and increasing the pressure they feel to perform tells us less about the inherent weakness of affirmative action than about the poor fashion in which programs are carried out. Affirmative action taken to ensure the inclusion of athletes and legacies has operated for decades without creating debilitating performance burdens on either football players or the children of alumni. There is no good reason that affirmative-action programs for minority students cannot be run in the same way.
Further more I would argue that based on the studies, even if affirmative action fails in practice, it is not hurting anyone. I am in no way moving away from my stance, just saying that even if affirmative action doesn't always work, it doesn't hurt white folks or anyone else.
Studies have shown that students of color who attend PWIs (predominantly white institutions) face internal problems because they tend to think that they are only admitted to college because of their race/ethnicity (partially because they see very few people who look like them). This even happens in schools in California where race-based admissions are illegal. They tend to call this the stereotype threat (google it if you want) which is not the most solid of theories but it works for my point. My point is that you would not discontinue admitting students of color because of a psychological fear that makes them "fail in practice."
I mentioned this somewhere else in this thread, but I really enjoyed American Apartheid, which goes into detail about this. We read it for my urban studies class... Heres the Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/American-Apartheid-Segregation-Making-Underclass/dp/0674018214?ie=UTF8&keywords=American%20Apartheid&qid=1462765389&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1
In the op there was no direct comparison that the law and restrictions in place in SW Michigan were the same as Apartheid South Africa. Just that the levels of racial segregation are.
That these levels exist without the overt structures present in South Africa, in my opinion are cause for greater alarm. Even though I do think that zoning laws that preserve class distinctions are a "law preventing either race from mingling" when socio-economic class and race are so intertwined as they are in this particular region. Also, a great book about preferences of racial mixture in neighborhoods is American Apartheid
http://www.amazon.com/American-Apartheid-Segregation-Making-Underclass/dp/0674018214
I'm not strictly talking about slavery. I'm talking about how they are treated and viewed now. Just look at the ghettos we have in America. In Massey and Denton's book American Apartheid they find a lot of interesting statistics. The largest amount of isolation any non-black minority has ever had (meaning, what percent of this population would have to move to make the overall population relatively uniform) was 56% for the Milwaukee Italian community in 1910. But by 1970, the lowest isolation percentage for blacks anywhere in the US was 56% San Francisco (pp 49). The highest in 1970 was 89% in Chicago. They also go into detail of how they were initially brought to those urban areas; to break union strikes in downtown factories. Combine that with WWI breaking out and extreme xenophobia with many European ethnicities, even more came. This lead to overcrowding, poor wages and conditions, white flight, and a continually worsening circle.
That was (and is) a horrible situation that isn't getting much attention: most criticism is put towards the people trying to adapt to the poor conditions and not how the conditions got there. This, in turn, breeds horrible stereotypes and more negative images and treatment in a feedback loop. While other minorities have experience mistreatment and oppression, I don't think any have been this persistent and horrible (though debating levels of oppression is inviting a pity party, which I would like to avoid).
I just bought R in Action on Amazon. Seems to come well-regarded!
Edit: Also ordered R for Spatial Analysis and Mapping.
There is nothing natural or inevitable about American ghettoes, they were created because of racist federal, state, and local policy. Because of redlining, the explicitly racist policy of the Federal Housing Authority to deny backing of home loans for Black people while granting them for whites, as well as because of racially restrictive housing covenants, Black people did not have access to the main wealth building tool of the middle class, home ownership in neighborhoods where homes had actual value. This forced black people into racially segregated neighborhoods that became ghettoes.
I'd recommend reading this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining#History
And this one as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation_in_the_United_States#Hypersegregation
If you want to go in-depth check out these books:
American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0674018214/ref=redir_mdp_mobile
Making the Second Ghetto: Race and Housing in Chicago 1940-1960 http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0226342441?pc_redir=1410759795&robot_redir=1
Check out the Princeton Field Guide. It's really nice and around $20. If you're looking for the spiritual side of things, I don't have the know-how to provide a recommendation but if you're interested in the mineral themselves you may like it. It has lots of beautiful images and the descriptions are really good. They'll tell you the environments where they form, what their crystal systems look like, how they tend to break (you'll want to know that for drilling your holes and such - I imagine you'd drill perpendicular to cleavage for less fracture).
As far as fancy rock names, you'll just put that together with experience. You can pick up an old edition Earth by Tarbuck for $10 online and that'll tell you all of your basics and from there you can easily branch out.
It can be confusing and frustrating at first, but just keep at it and it'll all come together with some experience. I can recommend things for days, but those books really helped me get a grip on the variety.
If you have any other questions, I'm super happy to help!
Princeton: http://www.amazon.com/Minerals-World-Princeton-Field-Guides/dp/069109537X
Earth: http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Introduction-Physical-Geology-8th/dp/0131148656/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407769493&sr=1-9&keywords=earth+tarbuck
My first piece of advice is to spend time narrowing your focus. I recommend this book to help you out.
Also, this blog post is particularly relevant for you.
> the Roma was destroyed by the Germans at dock
This may be of interest to you.
I didn't realize there were docks west of the Straits of Bonifacio
The Ultimate Navigation Manual is one of the best reference books to any skill that I have ever encountered, very clearly written with tons of clear photographs and illustrations to help depict concepts. I highly recommend it to anyone that might have need of navigation skills.
As long as we're recommending books How To Sail Around the World by Hal Roth covers pretty much everything you're asking.
You might also check his latest book: https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Spatial-Analysis-Mapping/dp/1446272958/
Hey, sorry for such a huge delay, it was a very busy time at work and I haven't had the chance to gather my thoughts up until now.
Bear in mind - most of the journal sources that I provide are behind a paywall unless accessed from an academic institution with an active subscription.
So, to start, some general reading on the Soviet employment and unemployment - Work, Employment and Unemployment in the Soviet Union by J. L. Porket, and his accompanying article on the same subject - "Full employment in Soviet theory and practice". Another good book on the subject is "Employment Planning in the Soviet Union: Continuity and Change" by Silvana Malle. A general overview of employment practices in the countries of the Eastern Bloc, if a bit outdated - "Employment Policies in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe", edited by Jan Adam.
Another good general source is this report on unemployment in the Soviet Union from 1992, which provides a lot of useful general info.
This article, "Unemployment in the Soviet Union: Evidence from the Soviet Interview Project", provides a good statistical overview of some of the major trends.
As for the people with disabilities, here is a good general article on the topic of disability in the Soviet Union - ""There Are No Invalids in the USSR!": A Missing Soviet Chapter in the New Disability History" by Sarah D. Phillips.
Also, these two works edited by Michael Rasell and Elena Iarskaia-Smirnova, and William O. McCagg and Lewis Siegelbaum respectively - "Disability in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union: history, policy and everyday life" and "The Disabled in the Soviet Union: Past and Present, Theory and Practice". I haven't personally looked at the second one, but one of the editors did publish and help edit some interesting works on the subject before, and, judging by the contents, it should be interesting and applicable.
You're welcome! You might also consider volume 3 and volume 4 of the analysis series by Stein and Shakarchi. There's also a great book by Tom Lindstrøm on the prerequisites to functional analysis, but it might be too basic for your needs.
Yup. Now it's up to $55. Still a great deal IMo, especially since there are many available on loan to students.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Statistical-Problem-Solving-Geography/dp/1478611197&ved=2ahUKEwi09NT5mKrgAhWIq1kKHZtNAq0QFjABegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw2rMC6g9wmIxWi6roAt3Erk
Here's the citation you're looking for.
Alright so if I had to recommend a singular book, it would be (Pragmatism: Critical Concepts in Philosophy)[ https://www.amazon.com/Pragmatism-Critical-Philosophy-Russell-Goodman/dp/0415288495]. It has a good overview of the entire pragmatist movement from the classical to the neo-pragmatists.
If you want specifics it’s a little harder, but I can try. I’ll try to avoid saying “read the entirety of their works,” and point you to specific sections or papers.
Peirce is amazing (glance at his wiki), no question about it. One of the greatest polymaths ever, in my books, but that’s part of the problem. He’s covered so much, and a lot of his writing presumes a strong basis in formal logic/math. I’m not sure if you do or don’t have that. So I’ll recommend two texts to you. The first is the Routledge profile on him. I’m a big fan of Routledge companion readers, and I admit I’ve never read this specific book. BUT, I recommended this to an ex, and she said it was a really great read. If you want a specific paper, I’d recommend “Some Consequences of Four Incapacities.” It provides a basic overview of the pragmatist project, many of the themes found here will be echoed throughout the tradition.
So I’m not a great fan of William James myself, but others tell me he’s amazing. I’d suggest picking up The Writings of William James Comprehensive Edition. Focus on sections 2 and 3, and read the essays “The Stream of Thought,” “The Will to Believe” (its really similar to the previous Peirce paper I recommended) and “Necessary Truths and the Effects of Experience.”
I like John Dewey a lot myself and would recommend a lot of his work, but I'll limit myself to two texts by him: “Studies in Logical Theory" and "The Quest for Certainty.” With all that said, I should mention that some of what the classical pragmatists argue for has shown to be quite problematic. I would read them more of their themes, but that’s just my opinion.
Moving onto the conventionalists, I found something rather brilliant. This is a link to a publically published chapter, prior to editing and uploaded by the author, of a book covering the conventionalists on academia.edu. I skim read it, and it’s a good overview and assumes very little background familiarity and eschews overly technical language on the part of the reader.
The Neo-pragmatists are a little trickier for me. I’m not that familiar with Rorty, I must admit. That said, his most famous text is “Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature,” which I believe contains most of his views. IDK, even that recommendation is really no better than me saying “read his SEP or IEP page," I'm coming from a place of ignorance.
With regards to Putnam, he’s sort of a pragmatist in denial, or a more appropriate way would be to say that he’s not a “full-blooded” pragmatist. He’s written quite a bit of commentary on the classical pragmatists, and he’s also written quite a lot on some interesting topics. Two texts that come to mind are “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’” and “Realism with a Human Face.” Putnam’s a rather fun guy to read and I’d recommend reading up on the change(s) he made in his philosophical life.
Robert Brandom, haven’t read much of him. But I would recommend “Making it Explicit.”
Concerning Quine… well I can recommend this. You can of course check out his famous “Two Dogmas of Empiricism” paper, and “Word and Object” (if you got the time), but there’s a really good “overview” of sorts, given by Paul Boghossian in his paper "Analyticity Reconsidered".
Other great pragmatists or philosophers that are related to the movement, include: CI Lewis (modal logic, attack on moderate foundationalism, etc.) Philip Kitcher (my experience of Rorty being largely composed of what I assume are caricatures, he seems to be the sensible Rorty), Wittgenstein (later Wittgenstein proves rather influential- especially his general method), and Carnap (one can see it in his goal for what a scientific language ought to be, and his principle of tolerance.). Pragmatism is a rather odd thing, it's not exactly easy to pick out what makes one a pragmatist or not. From what I can see it's normally a rejection of a priori metaphysics, naturalism, support of science, and a concern that all our conceptual resources be of some practical use. I hope all this helped. And if I got anything wrong/missed out on a crucial text/author please feel free to point out.
Have you tried the packages spdep, spatstat, gstat? In the class I took on this subject, we used these packages along with maptools and GISTools to avoid Arc entirely. This book was our reference:
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Spatial-Analysis-Mapping/dp/1446272958
If I'm not mistaken, the package spdep was developed by the authors of these books:
https://www.amazon.com/Applied-Spatial-Data-Analysis-Use/dp/1461476178
https://www.amazon.com/Spatial-Statistics-Geostatistics-Applications-Information/dp/1446201740
Were you instructed to use geoRglm?
I have a variety of books to recommend.
Brushing up on your foundations:
http://www.amazon.com/Beginning-Functional-Analysis-Karen-Saxe/dp/0387952241
If you get this from your library or browse inside of it and it seems easy there are then three books to look at:
More advanced level:
(An awesome book with exercise solutions that will really get you thinking)
Working on this book and Rudin's (which has many exercise solutions available online is very helpful) would be a very strong advanced treatment before you go into the more specialized topics.
The key to learning this sort of subject is to not delude yourself into thinking you understand things that you really don't. Leave your pride at the door and accept that the SUMS book may be the best starting point. Also remember to use the library at your institution, don't just buy all these books.
Skurka's book is good (likely the best way to get up to speed on gear), and his blog is excellent as well.
Other books I like:
For current information, these subreddits and sites like BackpackingLight will get you up to speed.
Thanks for the recommendation! The Kindle edition on Amazon is free. Looking forward to checking this out! [book] (http://www.amazon.com/Worst-Journey-Antarctic-1910-1913-ebook/dp/B004TIKVGM/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1374377803&sr=1-1&keywords=The+Worst+Journey+in+the+World+Antarctic+1910-1913+%5BKindle+Edition%5D)
Alfred Lansing's Endurance is a fantastically detailed, gripping account of Shackleton's polar expedition.
You can get a first-hand account of Scott's doomed expedition for free on Kindle: The Worst Journey in the World
And famous mountaineer Ed Viesturs has written several books about his time on Everest and K2: Viesturs
http://www.amazon.com/American-Apartheid-Segregation-Making-Underclass/dp/0674018214
Geography for Dummies, $15 on Amazon.
Source: https://www.amazon.com/Geography-Dummies-Ph-D-Charles-Heatwole/dp/0764516221
I recommend Minerals of the World by Ole Johnsen. I had to get this as a required text for my mineralogy class. It has mineral tables in the back, grouped by metallic/nonmetallic luster and ordered by hardness in order of softest to hardest. Also in the tables is the page number the main entry is on, so once you've identified the mineral, you can compare it to pictures in the text and view other information on it, such as economic importance. It's also cheap, so it'll set you back less than $20.00 on Amazon.
Hope this helped!
Request
https://www.amazon.com/World-Today-Concepts-Regions-Geography-ebook/dp/B01AKSZ9A2
The World Today: Concepts and Regions in Geography, 7th Edition
ISBN-13: 978-1119116363
​
Thank you!
The video is part of a "Let's Play" for 50 Cent: Blood On The Sand. (Let's Play emerged as a form of follow-along entertainment from games forums. Reasonably skilled players with a humorous or well-informed approach would start threads titled e.g. 'Let's play Metroid' and then do so, often with audience participation for character names, in-game choices, etc. As an introduction I'd recommend Let's Play Trespasser, possibly the best video LP to date.) Chip Cheezum played the game in sections and then recorded color commentary (no pun intended) with General Ironicus. In this clip Ironicus is reading a long excerpt from American Apartheid to quell off-topic linguistic discussions within the thread. His conclusion after finishing is worth hearing.
In a similarly boring helicopter rail-shooter section of the game, he reads Massey & Denton's impressions of gender politics as presented in rap and hip-hop, neatly dissecting some major aspects of the game's plot. Chip's only immediate reply is "while you were reading that, I killed, like, a thousand guys."
I'd say /u/MaceWumpus got it right.
If you want to know the details, I'd recommend this book. It's--in my opinion, at least--a really nice, readable introduction to Quine's ideas.
Looking for this book $5 https://www.amazon.com/Geography-Realms-Regions-Concepts-17th-ebook/dp/B01MT1SWHA
Here
Here is the mobile version of your link