(C.)
Online chat rooms have become a great source of communication. By utilizing a chat room, you can talk with lots of different people at once. The chat room is a good resource to use inside and outside of the classroom. They have allowed me to converse with other members of my biology class to discuss the lectures and labs. A lot of classes around campus have the chat rooms set up privately for only the students registered in that class, making sure that people who do not belong to a particular class do not gain access to the room. Overall, chat rooms are very effective resources.
(D.)
Unfortunately, inn Los Angeles, the use of dogs in the police force has been rejected, and the use of weapons is preferred. During the Watts riots, which took place in L.A., officers employed guns as a means of protection; some looters and perpetrators were killed (Knutson and Revering 64). However, dogs are a much more suitable and effective alternative to weapons as well as to excessive and deadly force. Although suspects have claimed to be badly bitten, these cases are extremely rare compared to the many documented good deeds and rescues involving human lives performed by police canines. It has therefore been concluded by the 6th Circuit Court that, "since deaths are rare in police dog cases, deploying dogs cannot be condemned as deadly force." (Savage para 12).
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Cohesive Devices Exercise
In today’s ever growing society, athletes are becoming more and more spotlighted in the media. @[That is to say that] an increase in the publicity of these athletes means that there are more opportunities to learn about how athletes train to become better. @[Sometimes,] they use steroids to gain a greater edge and get caught by their league. @[Thus,] the message that is sent to young people in today’s society is that it is ok to take steroids as long as you are not caught, and if you are caught the only penalty is some kind of fine or suspension. You rarely, if ever, hear of any side effects that steroids have. In my paper, I will discuss a policy that I have formulated with regard to steroid use. *My policy will be that there is a need to educate people on the effects of steroid use to decrease steroid use. @[Specifically,] People need to be educated on the physical effects that steroids have on the body, the mental effects that steroids have on the body, and the costs that steroids incur on society, especially the sports world. I think that I have a sufficient number of sources that will allow me to write an effective policy. If I find I need more information I can always do more research but I do not think that will be necessary.
I think that this exercise was useful. It made me analyze my writing, how I write, and how I can make changes. I do not usually think about cohesive devices when I write or edit, but now I might use this exercise when I write and edit so that I can make my paper stronger. It was also helpful in making sure everything flows well and making sure that everything is supported.
I think that this exercise was useful. It made me analyze my writing, how I write, and how I can make changes. I do not usually think about cohesive devices when I write or edit, but now I might use this exercise when I write and edit so that I can make my paper stronger. It was also helpful in making sure everything flows well and making sure that everything is supported.
FreeWrite
With only 9 days remaining until the annual Carolina-Clemson football game, there has been a change in the usual pep rally that occurs the friday night before the game. It has been decided to cancely "Tiger Burn," the traditional pep-rally the night before the Clemson game which concluded in a burning of a large engineered tiger. Instead, it has been decided to be renamed "Tiger Tear Down," in which two large tractors will tear down the tiger at the end of the pep rally. This decision to change has created some controversy on campus because it is breaking a very long and old tradition. I think that the decision to cancel the burning part of the pep rally has been done out of respect for those who died in the fires in North Carolina last month, and that it was the right thing to do. With the recent passing of 7 students between the two schools, I think it is only right to cancel something that might have such a negative connotation. I can understand why some might be upset because of tradition, but I think that this is more important. We will have to wait until next year to see if they keep the change to Tiger Tear Down or if it returns to Tiger Burn.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Carolina Reader Chapter 7 Question 5
Often times people talk about supporting the environment, and you hear about new-age technology that will make this possible. In both of their articles, Jamie Lincoln Kitman and Patrick Moore make somewhat surprising arguments about the effectiveness of hybrid vehicles and nuclear energy respectively, one with technology and ideas supposedly supporting the environment and one with technology and ideas hurting the environment. They both present their opinions, opposite of what you would expect based on knowledge that they support the environment.
Jamie Lincoln Kitman’s article entitled “Life In The Green Lane,” discusses the new popularity and technology that is associated with hybrid cars. Kitman argues that people purchase new hybrid cars because they have been led to believe that hybrid cars are better for the environment. He argues, however, that although a car may be a hybrid car, it might not be as good for the environment as a normal gas car. He talks about how hybrid cars receiving positive response from the government, even though they do not really deserve it. Also, when people talk about getting a hybrid, he suggests that they look at the fuel efficiency and miles per gallon that the car gets so they can be informed on what they are buying. He counters people who say hybrids are always better by showing that they are only better during city conditions where the battery engines can work comfortably. Once a hybrid car is driven on the highway, the computer tells the car to use the gas engine, being less efficient than a similarly sized gas car, which costs much less. In addition, he does not agree that hybrid cars should receive special treatment on the highway and in parking spaces because they really are not as beneficial.
Patrick Moore’s article entitled “Going Nuclear: A Green Makes The Case,” discusses the different energy sources and that we should convert our energy sources to nuclear power. He says that globally emissions will be greatly reduced. Also, he discusses how nuclear power would be less expensive than coal-fired electric plants and natural gas plants, more reliable and predictable than wind and solar power plants, therefore leaving it as the only viable substitute for coal. There are counterarguments that are made about nuclear energy, and he disputes these arguments. When people think nuclear energy is too expensive, he talks about how it is one of the least expensive energy sources. People often think that nuclear plants are unsafe because of Chernobyl, however he talks about how that was set up for disaster and failure, and that the incident on Three Mile Island is a good piece of evidence on how a problem at a plant can be easily controlled and contained. It is thought that nuclear waste will be dangerous for long periods of time, buy yet again he states that within 40 years, less than one-thousandth of the radioactivity of used fuel remains, and even this can be reused. When it is thought that nuclear plants are vulnerable for terrorist attacks, he states that they are well protected, and there are other, more penetrable places to attack.
After reading these two articles, I will no longer think that anything relating to supporting the environment will be about technology being good, and I will think that it is necessary to gain all information before making a decision on an issue. I think that these two are very persuasive because of their biography. By knowing that they are all for supporting the environment and maintaining it, they gain credibility and are able to be persuasive when they go against the stereotype and voice their true opinions. They are also persuasive because they back up their arguments with factual information. It is not very common that people in favor of supporting the environment will have these opinions, so when they do, the are very effective.
Jamie Lincoln Kitman’s article entitled “Life In The Green Lane,” discusses the new popularity and technology that is associated with hybrid cars. Kitman argues that people purchase new hybrid cars because they have been led to believe that hybrid cars are better for the environment. He argues, however, that although a car may be a hybrid car, it might not be as good for the environment as a normal gas car. He talks about how hybrid cars receiving positive response from the government, even though they do not really deserve it. Also, when people talk about getting a hybrid, he suggests that they look at the fuel efficiency and miles per gallon that the car gets so they can be informed on what they are buying. He counters people who say hybrids are always better by showing that they are only better during city conditions where the battery engines can work comfortably. Once a hybrid car is driven on the highway, the computer tells the car to use the gas engine, being less efficient than a similarly sized gas car, which costs much less. In addition, he does not agree that hybrid cars should receive special treatment on the highway and in parking spaces because they really are not as beneficial.
Patrick Moore’s article entitled “Going Nuclear: A Green Makes The Case,” discusses the different energy sources and that we should convert our energy sources to nuclear power. He says that globally emissions will be greatly reduced. Also, he discusses how nuclear power would be less expensive than coal-fired electric plants and natural gas plants, more reliable and predictable than wind and solar power plants, therefore leaving it as the only viable substitute for coal. There are counterarguments that are made about nuclear energy, and he disputes these arguments. When people think nuclear energy is too expensive, he talks about how it is one of the least expensive energy sources. People often think that nuclear plants are unsafe because of Chernobyl, however he talks about how that was set up for disaster and failure, and that the incident on Three Mile Island is a good piece of evidence on how a problem at a plant can be easily controlled and contained. It is thought that nuclear waste will be dangerous for long periods of time, buy yet again he states that within 40 years, less than one-thousandth of the radioactivity of used fuel remains, and even this can be reused. When it is thought that nuclear plants are vulnerable for terrorist attacks, he states that they are well protected, and there are other, more penetrable places to attack.
After reading these two articles, I will no longer think that anything relating to supporting the environment will be about technology being good, and I will think that it is necessary to gain all information before making a decision on an issue. I think that these two are very persuasive because of their biography. By knowing that they are all for supporting the environment and maintaining it, they gain credibility and are able to be persuasive when they go against the stereotype and voice their true opinions. They are also persuasive because they back up their arguments with factual information. It is not very common that people in favor of supporting the environment will have these opinions, so when they do, the are very effective.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Carolina Reader Chapter 7 Question 4
In both Jeffrey Kluger's and Richard Lindzen's essay's is there a discussion on global warming, however they differ in how they go about discussing global warming. They both discuss what global warming is and how it occurs, but after that they talk about opposite points of view.
Jeffrey Kluger's article entitled "Be Worried, Be Very Worried," is first a discussion of what is happening in terms of global warming and how it is being caused by humans. He talks about how scientists predicted that global warming was going to happen and that "even most skeptics have concluded...human activity has been causing it." (270) Kluger believes that our production of CO2 and their emissions have been causing many different natural disasters througout the world. He thinks that too much production "does and awful lot of damage." (271) The results of an increase in carbon dioxide is causing "glaciers and ice caps crumbling to slush," and also a rising sea level that could "swallow large parts of coastal Florida and most of Bangladesh." (272) He goes on to mention how feedback loops occur and that are causing soil to "warm and decompose, releasing gases that will turn into methane and CO2. That, in turn, could lead to more warming and permafrost thaw." (273) With an increase in CO2 causing permafrost thaw, a loss of thermoregulation would occur, which would mean we would have warmer ocean water and colder continents inside a hotter globe. He also talks about how global warming causes "the snowpack to melt too early, so that by the time it's needed, it's largely gone." (274) This promotes a problem because not only is the snowpack melting but if it is gone then a habitat for both plants and animals is also gone.
Richard Lindzen's article entitled "Climate of Fear: Global-Warming Alarmists Intimidate Dissenting Scientists Into Science," discusses global warming in a somewhat different approach. I felt when reading his article that he was trying to downplay the importance of global warming. He says that "levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have increased by about 30% ....and CO2 should contribute to future warming...however, what the public fails to grasp is that the claims neither constitute support for alarm nor establish man's responsibility for the small amount of warming that has occurred." (279) He is saying that claims are made but it is people who become alarmed not the scientists. He talks about the "Iris Effect, wherein upper-level cirrus clouds contracted with increased temperature, providing a very strong negative climate feedback sufficient to greatly reduce the response to increasing CO2," (280) and how his finding were discredited, most likely because it goes against global warming.
Overally, I think that Kluger's article is much more effective than Lindzen's. I think that Kluger provides specific evidence of causes and effects in the world with regard to global warming and the increase in carbon dioxide. His article seems more factual and less biased than Lindzen's. I feel that Lindzen's article is more of a whining rant because conducted a study that was decided to be discredited, and therefore his argument is not as effective.
Jeffrey Kluger's article entitled "Be Worried, Be Very Worried," is first a discussion of what is happening in terms of global warming and how it is being caused by humans. He talks about how scientists predicted that global warming was going to happen and that "even most skeptics have concluded...human activity has been causing it." (270) Kluger believes that our production of CO2 and their emissions have been causing many different natural disasters througout the world. He thinks that too much production "does and awful lot of damage." (271) The results of an increase in carbon dioxide is causing "glaciers and ice caps crumbling to slush," and also a rising sea level that could "swallow large parts of coastal Florida and most of Bangladesh." (272) He goes on to mention how feedback loops occur and that are causing soil to "warm and decompose, releasing gases that will turn into methane and CO2. That, in turn, could lead to more warming and permafrost thaw." (273) With an increase in CO2 causing permafrost thaw, a loss of thermoregulation would occur, which would mean we would have warmer ocean water and colder continents inside a hotter globe. He also talks about how global warming causes "the snowpack to melt too early, so that by the time it's needed, it's largely gone." (274) This promotes a problem because not only is the snowpack melting but if it is gone then a habitat for both plants and animals is also gone.
Richard Lindzen's article entitled "Climate of Fear: Global-Warming Alarmists Intimidate Dissenting Scientists Into Science," discusses global warming in a somewhat different approach. I felt when reading his article that he was trying to downplay the importance of global warming. He says that "levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have increased by about 30% ....and CO2 should contribute to future warming...however, what the public fails to grasp is that the claims neither constitute support for alarm nor establish man's responsibility for the small amount of warming that has occurred." (279) He is saying that claims are made but it is people who become alarmed not the scientists. He talks about the "Iris Effect, wherein upper-level cirrus clouds contracted with increased temperature, providing a very strong negative climate feedback sufficient to greatly reduce the response to increasing CO2," (280) and how his finding were discredited, most likely because it goes against global warming.
Overally, I think that Kluger's article is much more effective than Lindzen's. I think that Kluger provides specific evidence of causes and effects in the world with regard to global warming and the increase in carbon dioxide. His article seems more factual and less biased than Lindzen's. I feel that Lindzen's article is more of a whining rant because conducted a study that was decided to be discredited, and therefore his argument is not as effective.
Topic Proposal for Policy Paper
In today’s ever growing society, athletes are becoming more and more spotlighted in the media. The increase in the publicity of these athletes means that there is more opportunities to learn about how athletes train to become better. Sometimes, they use steroids to gain a greater edge and get caught by their league. The message that is sent to young people in today’s society is that it is ok to take steroids as long as you are not caught, and if you are caught the only penalty is some kind of fine or suspension. You rarely, if ever, hear of any side effects that steroids have.
In my paper, I will discuss a policy that I have formulated with regard to steroid use. My policy will be that there is a need to educate people on the effects of steroid use to decrease steroid use. People need to be educated on the physical effects that steroids have on the body, the mental effects that steroids have on the body, and the costs that steroids incur on society, especially the sports world. I think that I have a sufficient number of sources that will allow me to write an effective policy. If I find I need more information I can always do more research but I do not think that will be necessary.
In my paper, I will discuss a policy that I have formulated with regard to steroid use. My policy will be that there is a need to educate people on the effects of steroid use to decrease steroid use. People need to be educated on the physical effects that steroids have on the body, the mental effects that steroids have on the body, and the costs that steroids incur on society, especially the sports world. I think that I have a sufficient number of sources that will allow me to write an effective policy. If I find I need more information I can always do more research but I do not think that will be necessary.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Point IV for Policy Paper
The are three perspectives that I outlined in my paper. First, I discussed the original use and purpose for steroids, and why they were developed, and how their creators never intended for steroids to be used how they are being used today. Second, I talked about positives to steroids about increasing muscle size, getting better at athletics and providing more entertainment in the sports world. Third, I discussed the negative effects that steroids have. I talked about how steroids affect the body physically and mentally. Also, the effects that steroids have on society and doctors in terms of the costs that they cause.
Based on the current state of things, I think that the persepective that is most dominant is the perspective of the negative effects that steroids have. I think this is true because the negatives completley outweigh the positives. They are hurting people, both directly and indirectly. I think that the motivation for this perspective is the increase in use of steroids by people who are unaware of the effects. I think this is because with a lack of knowledge, people are making choices that they will eventually regret.
I think that the perspective that needds to be dominant is the perspective that there are many negative effects of steroids and steroid use. I think this is necessary because people need to be informed on all aspects of steroids. I think that this perspective also needs to be dominant because it will inform those who need to be informed, providing enough information for them to make their own educated decision.
The perspective can be enforced as a policy by making a policy that we need to educate people on the effects of steroid use to decrease steroid use.
Based on the current state of things, I think that the persepective that is most dominant is the perspective of the negative effects that steroids have. I think this is true because the negatives completley outweigh the positives. They are hurting people, both directly and indirectly. I think that the motivation for this perspective is the increase in use of steroids by people who are unaware of the effects. I think this is because with a lack of knowledge, people are making choices that they will eventually regret.
I think that the perspective that needds to be dominant is the perspective that there are many negative effects of steroids and steroid use. I think this is necessary because people need to be informed on all aspects of steroids. I think that this perspective also needs to be dominant because it will inform those who need to be informed, providing enough information for them to make their own educated decision.
The perspective can be enforced as a policy by making a policy that we need to educate people on the effects of steroid use to decrease steroid use.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)