TIME

The Most Powerful Protest Photos of 2014

There wasn't a corner of the planet untouched by protest this year, from the tear-gassed streets of Ferguson to the student camps of Hong Kong

In 2011, TIME named the Protester as the Person of the Year, in recognition of the twin people-power earthquakes of the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street. TIME named the Ebola Fighters as the 2014 Person of the Year, but you could have forgiven if we went back to the Protester. There wasn’t a corner of the planet untouched by protest this year, from the tear-gassed streets of Ferguson, Missouri, to the squares of Mexico City, to the impromptu student camps of Hong Kong. Many of the protests were remarkably peaceful, like Occupy Hong Kong, which was galvanized by public anger over the overreaction of the city’s police. Others turned bloody, like the Euromaidan protests in Kiev, Ukraine, which eventually brought down the government of pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, in turn triggering a war that led to the annexation of Crimea by Russia, the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in May and the deaths of thousands of Ukrainians.

Not every protest was as effective as those that began the year in the cold of Kiev. Hong Kongers still don’t have full democratic rights, gay rights are on the retreat in much of east Africa and every day seems to bring news of another questionable police killing in the U.S. But the wave of social action that ended 2014 is unlikely to crest in 2015. The ubiquity of camera phones means no shortage of iconic photographs and videos from any protest, whether in Lima or Los Angeles, and social media gives everyone the means to broadcast. What follows are some of the most powerful images from the global streets in 2014.

TIME natural disaster

See the Worst Natural Disasters of 2014

When it comes to acts of God, 2014 wasn’t a particularly active year. No powerful hurricane struck the U.S. like Sandy in 2012 or Katrina in 2005. There was no singlecatastrophic event like the Asian tsunami of 2004, which killed nearly 300,000 people, the Haiti earthquake of 2010, which killed over 200,000, or even the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland in 2010, which disrupted air travel for weeks.

But while there wasn’t a single iconic catastrophe, Mother Earth was still plenty busy in 2014. A volcano in Hawaii, a typhoon in the Philippines, wildfires in California and seven feet of snow in Buffalo—this year has witnessed its share of extreme weather and other natural disasters. The photos that follow are a reminder that when the Earth moves or the heavens strike, the results can be gorgeous to see—provided you’re not caught in the middle.

MORE: The most beautiful wildfire photos you’ll ever see

TIME health

Bird Flu Returns: What Past Outbreaks Can Teach Us

BRITAIN-HEALTH-BIRD-FLU
A man wearing a face mask walks through a duck breeding farm where a case of bird flu has been identified in Nafferton, in Yorkshire, England, on Nov. 17, 2014. Oli Scarff—AFP / Getty Images

As bird flu rears its head once again, take a look at TIME's past coverage of the virus

Usually the health status of chickens in the Netherlands isn’t world news. But reports that the Dutch government had culled tens of thousands of birds at poultry farms that were potentially infected with the avian flu virus H5N8 will worry human health officials as well.

That’s because avian flus have shown the repeated ability to jump the species barrier, infecting human beings—and killing them. The most dangerous virus has been H5N1, which has infected hundreds of human beings over the past decade, mostly in Asia, killing an estimated 60% of them. Bird flu infections in human beings are still very rare, usually occurring because of close contact with a sick birds. Right now avian flus like H5N1 haven’t shown the ability to spread from person to person. But scientists fear that an avian flu virus could eventually mutate, and become more transmissible—potentially starting a new flu pandemic. And if that new flu was as transmissible as the seasonal human flu, but as deadly as H5N1 would be, the result would make Ebola look like a slight cold.

Learn about the potential dangers of avian flu with these stories from TIME’s archives:

Feb. 9, 2004: The Revenge of the Birds

An H5N1 outbreak in Asia kills thousands of chickens — and leads millions more to be slaughtered. Though the number of humans affected is low, the outbreak raises fears about what could happen if the virus mutated.

The virus probably originates in southern China, but no one knows how it has spread so widely. Transport of infected birds to chicken farms is one theory, but it’s also possible that migratory birds such as ducks and geese are spreading it through their droppings. “Did birds in Hong Kong, which nest in Siberia and North Korea, somehow spread the virus elsewhere?” asks Robert Webster, an expert in animal influenzas at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn. “That’s a frightening possibility.” If H5N1 does evolve into a flu that humans can spread, a vaccine could be developed but would take months. “Once you know this virus can spread from human to human, region to region,” says Dr. Yi Guan, a SARS and avian-flu expert at the University of Hong Kong, “it’s already too late.”

Sept. 19, 2005: A Wing and a Prayer

The H5N1 virus, previously thought present in domestic animals only, appears in migratory birds, indicating that it has to potential to spread around the world.

For some time, health experts have warned of a worldwide bird-flu pandemic that could kill millions of people and wreck the global economy. “The most serious known health threat facing the world is avian flu,” said WHO director-general Lee Jong-wook earlier this year. And the threat is growing all the time, as nature keeps dropping hints that the links in a chain of events leading to a deadly pandemic continue to be forged. This summer, H5N1 spread west—perhaps in migrating birds—to new territory, including Mongolia, Tibet, Siberia and Kazakhstan. European countries are taking precautions by tightening surveillance of flocks within their borders; in the Netherlands, officials in late August ordered farmers to move the nation’s 90 million poultry indoors to prevent any contact with itinerant fowl. Meanwhile, in Southeast Asia, where at least 58 people have died and 150 million poultry have died or been culled because of avian flu since the end of 2003, the virus is still active; a Jakarta woman died of the disease on Sept. 10. The H5N1 virus has already shown it can be deadly to people who come into direct contact with infected birds or eat uncooked poultry. But bird-to-human transmission is relatively controllable because diseased flocks can be isolated or, usually, eliminated. The sum of all fears is that H5N1 could mutate into a strain with the ability to jump easily from person to person, as ordinary flu does. That could trigger a once-in-a-century catastrophe. How many would die? Nobody knows, or can know.

June 14, 2007: Living Cheek to Beak

A trip to Indonesia reveals some reasons why it’s harder than you might expect to contain the virus in birds: understanding of the potential for pandemic is low among village farmers, and the habits of daily life are harder to break. But, because of the close relationship between humans and livestock, the stakes in such a situation are particularly high.

Indonesia’s chickens are about meat and eggs, of course. But they are also a potentially deadly symbol of changing patterns of food production and consumption. While the H5N1 strain of avian flu has occasionally jumped from birds to people for several years now, the fear is that it will mutate and begin spreading easily from person to person, threatening the lives of millions. So a pandemic is why the world cares about dead chickens in a tiny rural village. Though the rare human bird-flu cases have gotten most of the attention, “the most effective way to prevent a pandemic is to stop the virus in animals,” says Dr. Bernard Vallat, director general of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). In other words: save the chickens, save the world.

May 18, 2009: How to Prepare for a Pandemic

An outbreak of swine flu (H1N1) highlights the reason why epidemiologists need to spend their time thinking about animals other than human beings. Many dangerous diseases (including Ebola) originate from animals and mutate into viruses that can be spread among humans.

Why should we spend scarce medical resources swabbing the inside of pigs’ nostrils, looking for viruses? Because new pathogens–including H5N1 bird flu, SARS, even HIV–incubated in animal populations before eventually crossing over to human beings. In the ecology of influenza, pigs are particularly key. They can be infected with avian, swine and human flu viruses, making them virological blenders. While it’s still not clear exactly where the H1N1 virus originated or when it first infected humans, if we had half as clear a picture of the flu viruses circulating in pigs and other animals as we do of human flu viruses, we might have seen H1N1 coming. (When it comes to sniffing out new pathogens, says one epidemiologist, “we’re like a drunk looking for his keys.”) Faster genetic sequencing and the Internet give us the technological means to create an early-warning system. But we need to spend more on animal health and get doctors talking to their veterinarian counterparts. “For too long, the animal side of public health has been neglected,” says Dr. William Karesh, vice president of the Wildlife Conservation Society’s global-health program.

Read more about the current outbreak of bird flu here on Time.com.

TIME Environment

The Keystone XL Pipeline: Three Stories to Help You Understand the Debate

Truth About Oil
The Apr. 9, 2012, cover of TIME PHOTOGRAPH BY KENJI AOKI FOR TIME

The House has approved a pipeline proposal; the Senate is expected to vote on the subject next week

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline has become the single most important environmental issue in the U.S.—even though its environmental impact may not even be that great. The pipeline would move some 830,000 barrels of crude a day from the Canadian oil sands in Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska and then down to the Gulf of Mexico. Keystone would make it easier for Canadian producers to sell their landlocked crude to the rest of the world—which is exactly what environmentalists fear. Oil sands crude is dirtier and has a bigger carbon footprint than conventional oil.

Landowners in Nebraska worry that a spill could contaminate the state’s vital aquifer, while environmentalists fear that the pipeline will speed the development of the oil sands and help add huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. But other experts argue that oil sands crude will come to the U.S. by another route—most likely through rail—or be sold elsewhere in the world if Keystone isn’t built, meaning the planet won’t be any better off.

Since it’s an international project, the President has to sign off on the Keystone pipeline before it can be built—and much to the consternation of the oil industry, President Obama has delayed his decision for years, claiming that he needs more time to study the pipeline. But with Republicans now firmly in charge of both houses of Congress—and many conservative Democrats in favor of the project—Obama may need to make a decision soon.

With a decision potentially on the horizon — the House passed legislation on Friday and the Senate is expected to vote on the topic next week — refresh your understanding of the debate with these three articles from the TIME archives:

Mar. 12, 2012: Cold Warrior

A profile of activist and author Bill McKibben explains why the pipeline extension drew environmentalists’ attention, and how they helped influence President Obama’s decision to reject a 2012 version of the application to build the pipeline:

Though Canada is already mining and selling oil-sands crude, McKibben saw the proposed Keystone XL pipeline–set to deliver up to 830,000 barrels a day to the U.S.–as a crucial accelerator. More practically, because the cross-border pipeline required State Department approval, he saw an opportunity to confront Obama, who dropped an early climate-change agenda in the face of stiff resistance. In late August, McKibben, along with major environmental groups, helped organize days of protest around the White House. Over 12,000 people showed up, and hundreds were arrested. In November, Obama said he would delay a decision until 2013. But Republicans tacked a provision onto a payroll-tax-cut bill mandating that the White House decide on the pipeline within 60 days. In response, Obama decided in January to reject Keystone XL altogether.

Apr. 9, 2012: The Truth About Oil

A broader look at new sources of oil explains why the crude that would travel through the pipeline is different from other oil:

Oil has never exactly been clean, but the new sources coming online tend to be more polluting and more dangerous than conventional crude. Producing oil from the sands in northern Alberta can be destructive to the local environment, requiring massive open-pit mines that strip forests and take years to recover from. The tailings from those mines are toxic. While some of the newer production methods eschew the open-pit mines and instead process the sands underground or in situ, which is much cleaner, they still require additional energy to turn oil sands into usable crude. As a result, a barrel of oil-sand crude usually has a 10% to 15% larger carbon footprint than conventional crude over its lifetime, from the well to the wheels of a car. Given the massive size of the oil-sand reserve–nearly 200 billion recoverable barrels–that’s potentially a lot of carbon. It’s not surprising that environmentalists have loudly opposed the Keystone XL pipeline, which would send 800,000 barrels of oil-sand crude a day to the U.S. “There’s enough carbon there to create a totally different planet,” says James Hansen, a NASA climatologist and activist.

Jan. 31, 2014: Report Raises No Major Climate Objections to Keystone Pipeline, But the Choice Is Obama’s

After the President’s initial rejection of the pipeline proposal due to insufficient information, the State Department spent the next few years putting together an assessment of its potential environmental impact. The finding, released early this year, was disappointing to environmentalists: that whether or not the pipeline was built, about the same amount of oil would be produced.

A lot has changed since Keystone was first proposed back in 2005. U.S. domestic oil production has soared, last year hitting the highest level in two decades—a fact that has weakened the case for the international pipeline. At the same, the rapid—and not always safe—growth of oil being shipped by rail in lieu of pipelines has shown just how creative the oil industry can be when it comes to moving their product. Given the overwhelming demand for oil, it’s quite possible that the State Department is right that whether or not the pipeline is built, it will have little impact on the carbon footprint of the oil sands—though that hasn’t stopped the Canadian government from lobbying hard for the project.

Read more of TIME’s science coverage in the TIME Vault

TIME

The Doctor on Your Wrist

Jawbone's Up 24 wristband
Jawbone's Up 24 wristband Jawbone

The next revolution in personal health may be the little band that tracks your steps

“The unexamined life is not worth living.” So said Socrates, and I’m trying to live up to the philosopher’s credo–in a 21st century way. On my wrist I wear a Jawbone UP24, a rubber bracelet that tracks my steps and calories burned over the course of the day. To make sure I don’t exceed the calories burned with calories consumed, I track my diet with the iPhone app MyFitnessPal, which syncs up with my Jawbone data. The Jawbone bracelet uses a motion sensor to track my sleep time, and the Jawbone app uses algorithms to calculate the hours I spend in light sleep and deep sleep over the course of the night. While I trained for the New York City Marathon, I tracked my runs with the iPhone app RunKeeper, which allowed me to see myself very slowly getting somewhat faster.

That kind of numeric detail probably isn’t what Socrates had in mind, but more and more of us are engaging in some form of digital self-examination. Research firm ABI estimates that 42 million wearable fitness and health devices will be shipped in 2014, up from 32 million in 2013. The movement even has a name–the quantified self–and its geekiest adherents go far beyond what I could bring myself to try. They carry digital cameras around their necks that capture a constant stream of visual memories and wear heart monitors and blood-pressure sensors up and down their torsos. They treat their bodies as guinea pigs and gather in meet-ups and conferences to swap stories–backed by data, of course–about the best ways to lose weight, work more efficiently and get smarter.

Hardcore disciples and those who, like me, just try to remember to wear a wearable share the same hope: that through collecting ever more information about our bodies and our behavior, we can find a better route to self-improvement. Doctors and researchers see something else in the movement too–a revolution that could change everything from how they care for recovering surgery patients to the way they administer certain medications. Tracking devices may eventually even upend how much you pay in health-insurance premiums. And they may ultimately change the way we relate to our own health.

But before you can really know thyself, you need to know thy data.

The logging of personal information has a rich history. Benjamin Franklin kept a meticulous chart book noting his progress on 13 virtues, and dieters in programs like Weight Watchers have long counted calories. But as anyone who has ever tried to keep a regular journal knows, recording it all on paper requires a commitment few of us can keep up for long. Digital self- tracking devices–often connected to the Internet through our smartphones–take the effort out of recording and compiling. You get better, more regular data, and it’s harder for you to fudge it to make yourself feel better. That also means the information is easily shareable with doctors.

To that end, hospitals are already a step ahead. The Cleveland Clinic has asked its employees and their family members–more than 50,000 people in all–to use the Pebble, an activity tracker, in the hope that it will encourage them to move more. So far, more than 18,000 people have met the goal of 100,000 steps a month or 600 activity minutes a month for six months. (That’s roughly 20 minutes a day.) There’s an added benefit: employees and family members who use the Pebble are eligible for a lower health-insurance premium.

Using Jawbone’s sleep app, I’ve seen how data analytics can make a daily difference. With Jawbone, I’ve come to understand that certain factors–stress, alcohol and caffeine–can influence how restful my sleep really is. The device’s accelerometer detects whether I’m moving and, roughly, whether I’m awake or in a light or deep sleep. The next morning, the app displays a graphic summary of my night. Over the weeks, I’ve been able to track how my sleep time has waxed and waned and how often I meet the 7½ hours I’ve set as a nightly goal.

I’ve found that I get the most sleep on weekends–unsurprisingly–but I’ve also noticed that my sleep tends to decline as the workweek drags on, perhaps because stress levels rise with each day. Just keeping track of how much time I’m actually spending awake has encouraged me to get to bed at a relatively reasonable hour and overcome the temptation to watch one more episode of Damages on Netflix.

Health professionals are finding that simply tracking an activity can encourage people to do more of it. In Minnesota, for instance, the Mayo Clinic experimented by using activity trackers to help with postsurgery care. In 2013 the hospital equipped nearly 150 heart-surgery patients over the age of 50 with Fitbit activity trackers on their first day of recovery. The reason: older patients tend to lose mobility in the wake of major surgery, which can slow recovery. The researchers found that patients who took the most steps every day–data tracked by their Fitbits–were significantly more likely to leave the hospital earlier than those who were less active, and they were also more likely to return home rather than to a nursing facility. Doctors knew that only because they were keeping track of a data point they had never bothered to record before.

The most valuable analysis comes when researchers are able to draw on a wide pool of data. And the growing ubiquity of fitness and activity trackers has made that pool into an ocean. It’s also caused some worries–the IT security firm Symantec reported in June that fitness trackers were often vulnerable to hacking. But the data keep flowing. Jawbone users around the world have recorded more than 130 million nights of sleep–which, as the company’s vice president of data, Monica Rogati, notes, technically makes it the biggest sleep study in the world–as well as more than 1.6 trillion steps and 180 million items of food. “You take all that data, and you can see interesting patterns emerge,” she says.

For example, Rogati knows that in the U.S., people in Southern states move the least. She knows that New Yorkers have a huge swing in sleep time between the weekdays and the weekends, whereas people in Orlando–a city well stocked with retirees–get similar amounts of sleep throughout the week. During the 2013 Super Bowl, which went down to the wire, she saw sleep numbers drop nationwide–but not during the 2014 Super Bowl, a blowout that many people tuned out early in the night. She can actually see the passage of Ramadan, a month when observant Muslims fast throughout the day, in a Middle Eastern city like Dubai. “People become less active during the day and sleep more, essentially become nocturnal,” she says. “The data tell you something about the signature of the city.”

All this information will matter only if we can learn something more valuable than the fact that a boring Super Bowl leads to an earlier bedtime. In a growing trend, Jawbone uses its data to produce personalized nudges designed to encourage users to sleep more, be more active and eat better. That analysis has also helped produce the smart-alarm function for the UP wristband. The Jawbone smart alarm tracks which sleep stage you’re in near your preferred waking time and buzzes your wrist when you’re in a light stage–hopefully nudging you out of bed at the right time biologically. “Sleep is as important as fitness and nutrition,” says Jason Donahue, product manager for data and insights at Jawbone UP. “By tracking it, you can give it the attention it deserves.”

Activity trackers are far from perfect. Some are bulky and unfashionable, and all suffer from accuracy problems. A 2014 study by researchers at Iowa State University looked at top fitness trackers and found that on average, they were 10% to 15% off in calculating the calorie burn from exercise and daily activity. But with each generation, the devices are getting smaller and more precise. The highly anticipated Apple Watch is supposed to be able to detect which activity you’re doing as you do it, along with your heart rate, which helps improve calorie-burn calculations.

Jawbone’s newest device, the UP3, will track heart rate using bioimpedance sensors, which measure the resistance of body tissue to a tiny electric current generated by the bracelet. In the future, the company believes the sensors will be able to detect skin temperature, respiration, hydration and more. That means greater quantities of finer data to feed into Jawbone’s algorithms, which in turn improves the advice the company dispenses as it tries to get you to eat better, sleep longer and be more active. “No one else has been able to get this amount of data on something small enough to wear on your wrist 24/7,” says Travis Bogard, Jawbone’s vice president of product management and strategy.

The new UP will enter an already crowded fitness-tracker market. Microsoft just released its first tracker–the Microsoft Band, which promises to track heart rate and an array of other data points. The first batch of smart watches using Google’s Android Wear operating system provides fitness functions like tracking runs or bike rides. And increasingly, most smartphones from the likes of Apple and Samsung have pedometers built right in.

That puts extra pressure on a company like Jawbone that produces dedicated activity trackers. There’s a lot riding on the success of the UP3, which Bogard and other executives at Jawbone were already using when I visited the company’s San Francisco headquarters in early October. But the excitement at Jawbone was generated less by the devices than by the data they produce–and the unexpected lessons Rogati’s team of data scientists could produce from all those bits and bytes. One wall of Jawbone’s open-plan office was covered with data stories generated by tracking millions of users, ranging from how the World Cup affected sleep patterns to a list of the most popular foods by time of day. (Beer: very popular after midnight, not so much before noon.)

Bogard believes that the future of self-tracking isn’t about the tracker; it’s about the self and the data it produces. “Our belief is that the tech itself should disappear,” he says. “The technology becomes an enabler to help us become more human.”

Once tracking has become ubiquitous, it could produce a health revolution. Right now, doctors have to wait for us to feel bad enough to bring our bodies into the shop; until we do, they’re in the dark. Data tracking could make it a lot easier for someone who is, for example, trying to manage a weight problem–especially if the data could be automatically uploaded to a doctor’s office. No more lying about how much you exercise or snack.

And personal data can mean personalized health care. The real winner may be not the company that makes the best device but the one that can produce a meaningful signal out of the noise of personal data. “No one thing works for everyone,” says Andrew Rosenthal, the group manager for wellness and platform at Jawbone. “We can help steer people toward the health solutions that work best for them.”

But as someone who began practicing self-quantifying for this story and has since become all but addicted to it, I can say there’s a personal side to this movement as well. So much of our health today feels out of our hands, the province of medical professionals. Self-quantifying has allowed me to take control of my health, to track and tweak my habits, to make myself a better person. Today I feel like a test group of one–but I’m in charge of the experiment, and I benefit from the results. You can count on it.

–WITH REPORTING BY ALEXANDRA SIFFERLIN / NEW YORK

TIME climate change

China Shows It’s Ready to Grow Up on Climate Change

President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping attend a press conference at the Great Hall of People on Nov. 12, 2014 in Beijing.
President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping attend a press conference at the Great Hall of People on Nov. 12, 2014 in Beijing. Feng Li—Getty Images

China lives up to its responsibilities on global warming

The U.S. diplomats wandering around the Copenhagen airport in the aftermath of the 2009 U.N. climate summit looked like the walking dead. With reason—those talks, billed as the most important climate negotiations ever, were pure torture for almost everyone involved, just barely saved from total collapse by the last-minute creation of the relatively weak Copenhagen Protocol. And while there was plenty of blame to go around, including for the U.S., much of it was directed at China, which consistently blocked negotiations throughout the summit and almost managed to torpedo the protocol. No wonder the American negotiators looked so exhausted—they’d just spent a fortnight grappling with a country that seemed firmly opposed to doing anything about global warming.

But China, it seems, has changed. The climate deal worked out between Washington and Beijing on Wednesday—you can see the details in this post by Emily Rauhala— won’t come close to saving the planet on its own. No, the deal isn’t binding, but few international agreements really are.

While together China and the U.S. account for 40% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, this marks the first time that the world’s two biggest carbon emitters sat down and agreed together to limits on future greenhouse gas emissions, however voluntary. And more importantly, it marks what seems to be a very different approach by Beijing on international climate diplomacy—and perhaps on diplomacy more generally.

As Michael Levi at the Council on Foreign Relations notes, the fact that Beijing chose to work together with the U.S.—usually an antagonist on climate and other issues—may be more meaningful than the emission targets themselves:

China has typically gone out of its way to assert its independence in anything climate-related. That approach would usually have led it to announce major goals like these in a clearly unilateral context – even if they were developed in tandem with the United States. Rolling them out together with the United States says that China is increasingly comfortable being seen to act as part of an international effort.

Environmentalists hope that the announcement from Beijing will inject a little momentum into flagging global climate negotiations, which begin shortly in Lima and are meant to culminate with a real global deal in Paris at the end of 2015. Perhaps. But while it might seem as if a problem like global warming can only be solved with a global deal that covers every country, the reality is that just a handful of countries account for nearly all greenhouse gas emissions—China and the U.S. first among them. What they do—alone or in concert—is what will ultimately matter.

There is no shortage of skeptics picking apart the U.S.-China deal—David Stout has a good roundup of them here. Any time governments make promises about action they won’t carry out for more than 15 years—long after today’s leaders are out of office—there’s reason to be skeptical. Climate diplomacy is like dieting: tomorrow is always a lot easier than today.

However, the very fact that China is publicly willing, in concert with the U.S., to dedicate itself to emissions targets that will be challenging is a sign that there is political will in Beijing to move on climate change, as well as political confidence that technological means will be there to do so without cramping the country’s all-important economic growth. It’s a sign, as Fred Kaplan writes in Slate, that China understands that “with great power comes at least some responsibility.”

That fact, more than the specifics of emissions cuts or timeframes, is what really made the China-U.S. climate deal historic.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser