The Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer is a popular beauty product that helps to dry nail polish quickly and efficiently. This device is designed to provide a convenient and effective way to dry painted nails without smudging or smearing the polish. One of the main features of the Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer is its built-in LED lights. These lights emit a safe and gentle UV light that helps to cure the nail polish, allowing it to dry quickly and evenly. The LED lights provide a low heat source that is safe for use on the nails and skin, making it an ideal option for those concerned about potential heat damage. Additionally, this nail dryer is compact and portable, making it easy to transport and use on-the-go.
The Salem witch trials stand as one of the infamous moments in colonial American history. More than 150 people -- primarily women -- from 24 communities were charged with witchcraft; 19 were hanged and others died in prison. In his introduction to this compact yet comprehensive volume, Richard Godbeer explores the beliefs, fears, and historical context that fueled the witch panic of 1692. The documents in this collection illuminate how the Puritans' worldview led them to seek a supernatural explanation for the problems vexing their community. Presented as case studies, the carefully chosen records from several specific trials offer a clear picture of the gender norms and social tensions that underlie the witchcraft accusations. The final documents cover recantations of confessions, the aftermath of the witch hunt, and statements of regret. A chronology of the witchcraft crisis, questions for consideration, and a selected bibliography round out the book's pedagogical support.
His first book, The Devil s Dominion Magic and Religion in Early New England 1992 won the American Historical Association Pacific Coast Branch Award for the Best First Book. Examination of Dorcas Hoar as recorded by Samuel Parris , May 2, 1692 ; Sarah Bibber against Dorcas Hoar, July 2, 1692 ; Elizabeth Hubbard against Dorcas Hoar, July 2, 1692 ; Ann Putnam Jr.
Additionally, this nail dryer is compact and portable, making it easy to transport and use on-the-go. Its lightweight design and battery-operated functionality make it perfect for traveling or for use when a power outlet is not readily available. Another notable feature of the Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer is its automatic sensor.
The Salem witch hunt : a brief history with documents
Introduction : explaining the Salem witch hunt. Putting Salem into a larger context ; Puritanism and the supernatural world ; Dangerous women ; Malevolent neighbors ; The witch panic of 1692 ; The afflicted girls ; Trying a witch ; The collapse of the trials - The documents. 1. Signs and assaults from the supernatural world. The arrival of a comet and the death of a star preacher ; Samuel Sewall finds reassurance in a rainbow ; The death of Cotton Mather's infant son ; Strange afflictions in the Goodwin household ; The horseshoe controversy in Newberry, Massachusetts ; Mary Rowlandson's account of the Indian attack on Lancaster ; Cotton Mather on the Quaker threat ; The Dominion of New England ; Cotton Mather on the recent history of New England --^
2. Beginnings. John Hale's account, 1702 ; Deodat Lawson's account, 1692 ; Samuel Parris on the outbreak of witchcraft accusations in Salem village, March 27, 1692 ; Samuel Parris's statement to his congregations about Mary Sibley's use of countermagic, March 27, 1692 --^
3. Witches on trial. Sarah Good. Arrest warrant for Sarah Good, February 29, 1692 ; Examination of Sarah Good (as recorded by Ezekiel Cheever), March 1, 1692 ; Elizabeth Hubbard against Sarah Good, March 1, 1692 ; Ann Putnam Jr. against Sarah Good, March 1, 1692 ; William Allen, John Hughes, William Good, and Samuel Braybrook against Sarah Good, Sarah Osborne, and Tituba, March 5, 1692 ; Abigail Williams against Sarah Good, Sarah Osborne, and Tituba, May 23, 1692 ; Indictment against Sarah Good for afflicting Sarah Bibber, June 28, 1692 ; Sarah Bibber against Sarah Good, June 28, 1692 ; Sarah Gadge and Thomas Gadge against Sarah Good, June 28, 1692 ; Joseph Herrick Sr.^
and Mary Herrick against Sarah Good, June 28, 1692 ; Samuel Abbey and Mary Abbey against Sarah Good, June 29, 1692 ; Henry Herrick and Jonathan Batchelor against Sarah Good, June 29, 1692 ; Samuel Sibley against Sarah Good, June 29, 1692 ; Death warrant for Sarah Good, Rebecca Nurse, Susannah Martin, Elizabeth How, and Sarah Wilds (July 12, 1692) and officer's return (July 19, 1692) - Tituba. First examination of Tituba (as recorded by Jonathan Corwin), March 1, 1692 ; Second examination of Tituba (as recorded by Jonathan Corwin), March 2, 1692 ; Elizabeth Hubbard against Tituba, March 1, 1692 ; Ann Putnam Jr. against Tituba, March 1, 1692 ; Indictment against Tituba for covenanting with the devil, May 9, 1693 - John Proctor.^
Elizabeth Booth against John Proctor, April 11, 1692 ; Abigail Williams against John Proctor, May 31, 1692 ; Physical examination of John Proctor and John Willard, June 2, 1692 ; Mary Warren against John Proctor, June 30, 1692 ; Petition of John Proctor, July 23, 1692 ; John DeRich against John Proctor and others, August 4, 1692 ; Samuel Sibley against John Proctor, August 5, 1692 ; Petition for John Proctor and Elizabeth Proctor, August 5, 1692 ; Petition for John Proctor and Elizabeth Proctor, August 5, 1692 - Bridget Bishop. Examination of Bridget Bishop (as recorded by Ezekiel Cheever), April 9, 1692 ; William Stacy against Bridget Bishop, May 30, 1692 ; Sarah Churchill and Mary Warren against Bridget Bishop and others, June 1, 1692 ; Physical examinations of Bridget Bishop and others, June 2, 1692 ; John Bly Sr.^
and Rebecca Bly against Bridget Bishop, June 2, 1692 ; Richard Coman against Bridget Bishop, June 2, 1692 ; John Louder against Bridget Bishop, June 2, 1692 ; Samuel Shattuck and Sarah Shattuck against Bridget Bishop, June 2, 1692 ; Susannah Sheldon against Bridget Bishop and others, June 3, 1692 - Dorcas Hoar. Examination of Dorcas Hoar (as recorded by Samuel Parris), May 2, 1692 ; Sarah Bibber against Dorcas Hoar, July 2, 1692 ; Elizabeth Hubbard against Dorcas Hoar, July 2, 1692 ; Ann Putnam Jr. against Dorcas Hoar, July 2, 1692 ; Mary Walcott against Dorcas Hoar, July 2, 1692 ; Mary Gage against Dorcas Hoar and others, September 6, 1692 ; John Hale against Dorcas Hoar, September 6, 1692 ; Joseph Morgan and Deborah Morgan against Dorcas Hoar, September 6, 1692 ; John Tuck against Dorcas Hoar, September 6, 1692 ; Petition of John Hale, Nicholas Noyes, Daniel Epes, and John Emerson Jr. September 21, 1692 - George Burroughs.^
Benjamin Hutchinson against George Burroughs and others, April 22, 1692 ; Examination of George Burroughs (as recorded by Samuel Parris), May 9, 1692 ; Elizar Keyser against George Burroughs, May 9, 1692 ; Mercy Lewis against George Burroughs, May 9, 1692 ; John Putnam Sr. and Rebecca Putnam against George Burroughs, May 9, 1692 ; Mary Walcott against George Burroughs, May 9, 1692 ; Simon Willard and William Wormall against George Burroughs, May 9, 1692 ; Abigail Hobbs, Deliverance Hobbs, and Mary Warren against George Burroughs and others, June 1, 1692 ; Mary Webber against George Burroughs, August 2, 1692 ; Ann Putnam Jr. against George Burroughs, August 3, 1692 ; Physical examination of George Burroughs and George Jacobs Jr. August 4, 1692 ; Hannah Harris against George Burroughs, August 5, 1692 ; Sarah Wilson and Martha Tyler against George Burroughs, September 15, 1692
Access-restricted-item true Addeddate 2014-07-22 14:08:48.413044 Bookplateleaf 0002 Boxid IA1138801 Camera Canon EOS 5D Mark II Containerid S0022 Donor bostonpubliclibrary External-identifier urn:oclc:record:1035757900
urn:lcp:isbn_9780312484552:lcpdf:994b6c2d-9505-4912-ac1c-2919ba9f61d6
urn:lcp:isbn_9780312484552:epub:7a7d1efb-2b85-4441-988f-33b6369c2eaa Extramarc University of Michigan Foldoutcount 0 Identifier isbn_9780312484552 Identifier-ark ark:/13960/t1bk58x29 Invoice 1213 Isbn 9780312484552
0312484550 Lccn 2010933562 Ocr_converted abbyy-to-hocr 1.1.20 Ocr_module_version 0.0.17 Openlibrary_edition OL25886620M Openlibrary_work OL17312854W Page-progression lr Page_number_confidence 88.16 Pages 230 Ppi 500 Republisher_date 20160114013944 Republisher_operator [email protected];[email protected] Scandate 20160107034612 Scanner scribe8.shenzhen.archive.org Scanningcenter shenzhen Source removed
This sensor detects when a hand is placed under the dryer and automatically activates the LED lights. This hands-free operation allows for convenient and fuss-free drying of nails. Furthermore, this nail dryer is compatible with a wide range of nail polishes, including gel and regular polish. The powerful LED lights ensure that the polish dries quickly and remains chip-free for an extended period of time. In conclusion, the Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer is a practical and efficient tool for drying nail polish. Its LED lights, portable design, and automatic sensor make it a convenient option for both at-home use and on-the-go touch-ups. This device is a must-have for anyone looking to achieve salon-quality results in the comfort of their own home..
Reviews for "The Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer: A Game-Changer for Nail Enthusiasts"
1. Sarah - 1 star
I was really disappointed with the Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer. First of all, it took forever to dry my nails. I pressed my fingers into the machine and waited for what felt like ages, but my nails were still wet. Secondly, the machine was very flimsy and cheaply made. It broke after using it only a few times, which was a complete waste of money. I would not recommend this product to anyone looking for a reliable and effective nail dryer.
2. Michael - 2 stars
I had high hopes for the Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer, but sadly it didn't live up to my expectations. Although it did dry my nails faster than air-drying, it didn't completely dry them. There were still smudges and streaks on my nails after using this machine. Additionally, the design of the dryer was not very user-friendly. It was difficult to position my fingers correctly inside the machine, and I often ended up touching the wet nails against the walls. Overall, I found this nail dryer to be ineffective and frustrating to use.
3. Emily - 2 stars
I regret purchasing the Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer. While it did dry my nails relatively quickly, the quality of the machine was subpar. It felt very flimsy and unstable, and I was worried about it breaking every time I used it. Moreover, the machine emitted a strong chemical odor that was quite unpleasant. I ended up returning the product and investing in a more reliable and durable nail dryer. Save your money and avoid this one.
4. Jacob - 1 star
The Make it Real Light Magic Nail Dryer was a complete waste of money. Not only did it take ages to dry my nails, but it also left an uneven finish. Some nails were completely dry, while others were still tacky and smudged easily. The construction of the machine was poor, with buttons that didn't work consistently. It was a frustrating experience overall, and I would not recommend this nail dryer to anyone. There are much better options available on the market.