essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
9c4fcad | For the past few years, people have come to theories that the Electoral College is flawed. Citizens have come to this conclusion due to the fact that Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and AFL-CIO, all agreed to abolish the electoral college. Also, over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind the U.S. is using now. Finally, under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who then, in turn, elect the president. The election system should be changed to popular vote for the President of the United States because the system is more reliable, and the president is chosen by the people.
Due to past problems in the Electoral College, people can come to a conclusion and say that the popular vote system is more reliable. As mentioned in Source 2, Bradford Plumer says that, "The single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse." The Electoral College was to be blamed when in 2000, the electors defied the will of the people. On the contrary, as stated in Source 1, "The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens." Even the Founding Fathers believed in the vote from the people to elect their leader, but it has shifted away from it.
It was always believed that the people elected the president, but it has been proved that it isnt that way. As mentioned in Source 3, "Voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide and election." Due to the Electoral College, voters, knowing their vote will have no effect, will have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were chosen by popular vote. This shows that if citizens knew that their votes were for voting for someone to elect their president, they would lose interest and stop voting.
Overall, the popular vote system is more reliable because of the vote of the citizens, rather from a slate of electors. Also, it was believed that people elected the president, but in reality, people voted for electors to vote for their president. Next, the Electoral College has many flaws, one of them being that the electors defy the will of the people. And also, that electors may be replaced on purpose to go against a candidate. Finally, the Electoral College should be abolished because it is unfair, outdated, and irrational. | 4 |
9c50ac5 | I strongly believe people should join and be a seagoing cowboy. If you like riding at sea and love animals this is a job for you. Have you ever wondered how other countries are? Or ever wnted to go to another country.
Well now you have an opportunity to see lots of other countries.
You can save peoples lives. In some countries they don't have the food we do. The least we can do is help them get a boost. And some countries need animals so they can have food or transportation. It will give you a good experience. But if you get sea sick, ect. You are not fit for this job. Just think about if you were one of those people, no food, no animals,no transportation. You may think that you could be away from your family and it's a waste of time but think of it this way, there are other families out there just like you, hungry starving. Or could already be dead,lets not let that happen to any more families.
This is a one in a life time opportunity. You can save alot of lives from hunger. Afterwards once the animals are all unloaded you can have some fun. You can play baseball, volleyball, table tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling,games will make things seem quicker. You can also have a good feeling in your heart for helping others. Think about others, care about others. | 3 |
9c60ce6 | I most defintely agree with the scientists behind the Facial Action Coding System. By having the ability to read a student's emotions the world of education could make huge strides. By simply altering a lesson to fit a child's personality, the lesson could become more enjoyable and less challenging for the child.
Dr. Huang predicts that, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson like an effective human instructor." If Dr. Huang is in fact right about his technology's potential, children all over the world could become better educated. From my own personal experience I know that when the lesson deals with something I am less interested in I become bored, but if the lesson metions something I enjoy, then it becomes ten times easier.
Dr. Huang also says that, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication." This is one of the most important lines in the article. By saying this, Dr. Huang opens up a world of oppurtunities for his technology. Many teachers around the world would agree that their students when talking, commuicate more with their emotions than physical words. These teachers would be able to know how their entire class was feeling as soon as they walked in. This would enhance the teacher's teaching style for the day ,and increase the students learning oppurtunity.
Dr. Huang's final arguement is also very important. He says when reffering to nonverbal human communications that, "Computers need to understand that to." Dr. Huang believes that computers must learn to read the human emotions, and I agree. This generation is becoming more and more about technology, and most schools have converted completely to technology based schooling. If every school had the ability to use the Facial Action Coding System, the intelligence of this generation and generations to come would continue to grow exponentialy.
The Facial Action Coding System, is a huge new technology that would make huge improvements to classrooms. Its ability to recognize emotions would not only benefit students, but would benefit the teachers of those students. The intelligence of our generation and genrations that preceed us will continue to grow with the use of FACS. | 4 |
9c637a9 | Drivless cars has its cons and pros to it, but i would say it's a bad idea. Drivers have already enough on their plate when driving because not only do they have to keep themselves safe but also the people in the car and other cars that share the same road. Also the coast of this car would be outrageous. Most Americans would not be able to afford that luxery. The "driverless" car is also not something that represnts its name. When I think about "driverless" car I think about cars that have no need for divers even in the passaenger seat. These cars are not what they say they are, they only can drive when its easy and they alerat you when they could not be able to drive anymore. If companies are going to makes a driverless car they should go all out and not excite the consumers with hopes and lies.
In America it will always come down to one thing, money. How much time and research will it take to produce this car? "In the late 1950s, General motors created a concept car that could run on a special test track ... track was embedded with an electrical vale that sent radio signals to a reciever on the front end of the car" also "Engneers at Berkeley tried soemthing similar, but they used magnets with alternating polarity.. in binary code". While both of these test and ideas were a great invention the article stated it was just too expensive. Is this centurys technology different or more advance. America is 19 trillion dollars in debt this past year and the debt is only rising. If these cars would undergo production that would be a lot of money to produce and they would sell them for a lot more to the buyers, a luxery many americans can't afford. Then they would be left with no buyers and a ton of un-used cars, it would truely be a waste of money. Thats even saying if they can compose the car correctly.
There are also many other factors when it comes to testing and trying to produce these driverless cars. "In most states it is iligal to test computer-driven cars" so where do the comanies like GMC, BMW, and other companies that produce cars will test their cars. Testing the cars in safety and how it works is a must but what are the car companies going to do if they ever do get approved with their car. Laws in every state would have to shift and new laws would have to be created. Also new insurance policys would have to be created. All of this adds up to be a lot of money, something most amercians do not have.
In ever case of an acident, who's fualt woudl it be, driver or manufactuer? With the new laws that would have to be passes with this driverless car new libility coverages would have to be passes and bought by the consumers. Many question will arrise fromt he consumers. Their car insurance will defiantly go up just in cae of an accident. If an accident ever did occur in the hand of the driverless car, that never alerted the driver to take control, insurance would have to cover it of course but its not the drivers fualt for a malfunction in the car. The manufacture should be the one the pay the accident. Another con would be if the manufactur should on take the responsiblity and a even bigger accident happend like a death and the driver blammed it on the driverless car, who would go to jail then. These are many the factors one should think about before putting the driverless car in the market.
"Tesla has projected release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 precent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020". The driverless cars are already an undergo in production. No laws have been passed yet that could be able to drive this driverless car except California,Nevada,Florida, and the District of Columbia have allowed to only test cars. If these big car comapies decide to start working on and producucing thses cars they are going to have a while until they can start selling them due to no state allows american to drive. Thats more money they spent in pruduction that they will not see back right away. They will cuase Amercia to be more in debt. | 5 |
9c64a04 | I profoundly believe that the United States should not keep the Electoral College because the person who has the popular vote may not win presidency, and the "winner take all" system causes voters in certain states to not feel like they are creating an impact. The electoral college is a process that the founding fathers established in the constition. The electoral college consits of 538 electors and a majority of 278 votes.
In our voting system even if a candidate receives more votes than their opponents he or she still could lose the election because of the electoral college. Here is a prime example, in the 2000 election Al Gore won the popular vote but because he had less electoral votes than Bush he unfourtunetly lost the election. According to Bradford Plumer "over 60% of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." It seems rather logical that if somebody gains the most votes in an election that the country would prefer that canidate to be the president. For that reason alone the reader should side with the idea to abolish the electoral college. Now besides somebody receiving more or less electoral votes, perhaps the candidates tied. In this case it gets thrown to the House Of Representitives which will cause a Wyoming Rep. with 500,000 voters to have just as much say as a California Rep. with 35,000,000 voters. All a tie would do is corrupt the voting system even more than it is. For those reasons there should be an indefinite ban on the electoral college.
Additionally the winner take all method in some states makes voters feel unimportant. Some may argue that no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president but regions do have the power to swing an election in an enourmous way. An effect of the winner take all system is candidates not going to certain states if they know they can not win it. This can basically stop some voters from wasting time and voting because they may feel there personal vote would make no difference. In the 2000 election "17 states did not see candidates at all." according to Bradford Plumer. How could somebody possibly feel engaged in an election if whoever is running finds there vote unimportantant to them winning the election.
In conclusion it is official that the electoral collage is unfair, out dated, and irrational. With that being said we should abolish it because it stops the voter who has the majority of votes from winning, and can undoubtably make voters feel unimportant. | 4 |
9c6dd12 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I am not against it or up for it. These cars
yes they have their positives and negatives so here is what the author said in the article that was really interesting. For example some of the positives might be that the car can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves , but the human must remain alert and ready to take over when a situation is required for a human.
Lets say that there is something that the driveless car can not do. When the car is in danger
it can quickly get the drivers attencion when there is a problem. The drivers seat will vibrate if in danger. Also the google car announces when to take over sonat least you get the heads up. Yes, i agree that it sounds vey nice and that you dont want to drive know and then. However the car will not allow you text and drive because that can lead to getting injured.
Lets say the driver wants to take over and drive for him/herself
this display is allowed to get turned off but something that is not available to drivers would be texting with a phone. The car in general is a safefty feature an safety is really a big concern in todays world. The car does however watch the driver while the driver watches the road. There is going to be new laws towards this driveless car. If the technology fails and
someone ends up getting injured , whos fault is it really? Could it be the driver?Would it be the manufacturer? It would honestly depend on how bad the situation was. | 3 |
9c6f763 | In the artilce '' The Challenge of Exploring Venus , the author suggests that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents . The author supports the idea of studying Venus is a pursuit despite the dangers because it should be fun to learn about and people could know new information about venus and whats on the sun and the earth . In the article it says ''Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additonal impediments like eruptiing volcanoes , powerful earthquakes and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface . My conclusion for this essay is talking about what venus does in the sun and the earth and how it acts towards peoples cells . I would say that Venus sounds hot and cool because theirs a lot facts and information about venus that people what to know about and how Venus has a value to the sun and the earth . And I like how Nasa has a idea to send people to study Venus and see what Venus is like and what it looks like . The author supports the claim because the author is talking about what people are doing and what they are seeing in Venus and how the author wants to see people go down to the earth and see Venus . | 2 |
9c72dba | Changing the world is seemingly hard to do on this Earth today. Our society has made so many breakthroughs in technology and science that it's hard to find someone who doesn't have the knowlege of the world in their front pocket (a cell phone). However, cars that don't require a driver or that are "self-driving" could be one of the biggest breakthroughs in history. Imagine, "...a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." that would be magnificent! Right?, maybe not.
The text says that these cars would only use half the fuel of today's taxis, offer far more flexibility of a bus, and they would be driven by computer or binary code road systems. But such cars lead to the question, "Are they safe?". My position on this topic is, if it is not proven that these cars are sufficent and lives are being saved before they are put in danger on the road then I want no part in them. All throughout the history of technology there has always been a shadow. You cannot have any peice of technology that doesn't have difficulty, a crashing sytem, or complexity closely following. What if these seemingly robot cars happen to have a system failure and take the lives of all it's passengers? Who is to blame there the manufacturers? Now, I do agree that the roads today are dangerous due to wreckless drivers, people driving under the ifluence among other things, but if a new automatic transportation sytsem causes more problems then what exactly is the point?
Sometimes it's best to sit back and be satisfied with what we have before we have nothing to sit back on as well as nothing to be satisfied about. People today are so focused witht the "hip" and the "now" that us as human beings are becoming more and more disconnected everyday. We spend more time in technology then we spend with those around us and it is very heartbreaking. We aren't going to live forever but some of us aren't even "living" right now. I understand that we are trying to better our world for the generations to come but is new advanced technology really what is best?
From the way we treat our planet right now there won't be any green for the next generations, we'll have to tell them stories and show them pictures because we took all of it away from them. So if you asked me about "advancement" I'd say I'm more focused on preserving. Maybe instead of new cars that drive themselves, we need more people driven to save our planet. Because cars don't "... fundamentally change the world." , we do. | 4 |
9c73494 | There are many advantages to limiting car usage in America, and all around the world. As the future grows near, gas prices are skyrocketing and frankley, gas is being all used up. Cities and communities are building subburbs that dont allow cars and passing laws that ban driving. Many people may read this and view it as unfair or irrelevant, but we should be applauding it and considering these ideas in our own communities.
Vuban, Gerrmany is one of the pioneer subburbs to try the following idea. In this Subburb: Street parking, driveways, and home garages are all not allowed. Instead, when you buy a house, you buy a parking space at a large garage for 40,000$. You keep your car there while you live in the homes. Some statistics back up this movement as well. In Europe, cars are responsible for 12% of gas emissions, and in the some parts of the US, cars are responsible for up to 50%. Cutting down on driving helps the enviroment and lowers accidents and fatal driving deaths each year.
Paris, France is having some conflict with automobiles as well. The smog caused by the surplus of cars was filling the city and harming residents. As a result, Paris had to ban driving that day and fine those who drove anyway. This was all in effort to reduce smog and pollution from the city. Once the smog cleared they lifted the ban. Many counties along with Bogota, Columbia have participated in banning cars for a day or week to reduce it bad effects on nature.
Even the United States is getting in on the action. Over the last few years, citizens are buying fewer and fewer cars each year, suggesting Americans best car days are behind us. If this pattern persists it will have major implications on carbon emmision and the enviroment. People taking the bus or biking to work have played a huge role in car sales dropping. There has also been a drop in 16 - 39 year olds obtaining drivers licences. Instead, they prefer getting rides and car-pooling with friends.
As you can see limiting car usage has global effects on safety and the enviroment. America and many other cities and communities around the world realize car's effects and are moving on from them, and from what I see, im very excited. | 3 |
9c738bb | Dear Mr. Senator,
The peope of American should let their voice be heard. Why should we rely on the electoral college to pick our prisendent? In fact if you're going to rely on the electoral college to pick our next president why let civilized American citizens vote? I would say it is time for a change and let the American people's voice be heard. It seems as if the passage is more in favor of elections based on the electoral college votes. The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. At the most basic level,the electoral college is unfair to voters because it's a winners takes all system. The electoral colllege consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect your president. The elctoral college is anachronism and it's time we should be open minded and look in to the future and rely on the Americans votes we should not rely on 538 people to vote for the millions of people we have in America. Even if we had a combination of the popular vote with elctoral college that would make it more fair than just having the electoral college pick the president they want in office. Instead of relying on this piece of history lets rely on bring cheap clothes,food,and gas prices back. | 2 |
9c76a86 | Driverless Cars are Coming is a story about cars that don't really require a human driver. It talks about the history of driverless cars and how far they have come. It also gives some examples of some driverless cars. However, in the story it describes how these driverless cars have some positive and negative aspects. I believe that these cars have positive aspects and should be developed more because they are able to mimic the same skill of a human at the wheel, the drivers will be more alert, and they have a lot of safety functions.
To begin with, I am for the development for the driverless cars because they are able to mimic the same skill of a human at the wheel. For example, in the story it says, "Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial notion sensor. The most important bit of technology in this system is the spinning sensor on the roof. Dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings. The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel."
In addition, the next reason I am for the development of driverless car is because the drivers will be more alert. For example, in the story it says, "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object." The story also says, " The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." Finally, one last example from the story is when it says, "Manufacturers are also considering using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver."
Finally, the last reason I am for the development of driverless cars is because they have a lot of safety functions. For example, in the story it says, "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over---something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone. In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern." Also, another example the story says is, " The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone."
In conclusion, I am for the development of driverless cars because they are able to mimic the same skill of a human at the wheel, the drivers will be more alert, and they have a lot of safety functions. | 3 |
9c8a075 | State Senator I disagree on keeping the Electoral College! For only the electors choose who is going to be the new President, I say we get dispose of it and change the election to most popular vote! That way we also have a say on who is going to be the new President and the new Vice President. For we also have to have a say on this.
The thing that is wrong with this system is that the voters do not vote for the President, but for the slate of the electors who in turn elect the President! like it says on source 2 paragraph 10 "If you lived in Texas and wanted to vote for [John] kerry
The Electoral College does not let us, the people, choose who is going to be the new President it only allows the electors choose who it's going to be by their vote! For an example on the 2000 U.S. Presidental race, Al Gore recieved more of the individual votes than George W. Bush, but Bush only the won election because he recieved 271 electoral votes than Al Gore's 266! It wasn't fair that | 2 |
9c8b1e4 | This article show us many emotions that each person have, and how our face expressed emotions by any situation. Also explain the most common emotions that each person used more, they are happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness. One example of this article is the art of Leonardo da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" that explain the Mona Lisa have many emotions this is comproved by a software that show the Mona Lisa has some differents emotions. Scientifics of the University os Illinois. They are working in collaboration with another scientifics and anothers Universitys about if we can calculate emotions and all this process begin about muscles. Movement of body and movement of all the muscles this means that we are sad or happy or actually fear we can note or show to someone else. IN this article the example the how we can calculate our emotions is about the face's muscles if you are suprised the most common movement is raises your eyebrows or a smile when you are happy or also tightens your lips when you are angry. We have a lot of expresions that helps us how we feel or how exprese our emotions. This is important because we should know each person it is different and show how many people expresed their emotions by differents ways. | 1 |
9c8b1e6 | Dear State Senator,
I think the Electoral College shouldn't decide on electing the president. The electoral college only focuses on electors from the state that are pleged to one of the candidates trying to win presidency. The people are not actually voting who they want to become president. Somrtimes the Electoral College can take a long procces. If there is a tie between two candidates, meaning they both have 270 Electoral votes, the house of representatives would have to decide.
There are reasons for retaining the electoral college despite it's lack of democratic pedigree. Certainty of Outcome, if one of the candidates has the most electoral votes that candidate wins office. Onother would be the number of electors a state has, for instance, if one state has a bigger population than onother state it would contain more electoral votes for a candidate. Swing states, when a candidate has the majority of electoral vote, that wins office, thats why they have the winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes. | 2 |
9c8d646 | The use of this technology is not valuable because ,it will not always be accurate .You can't tell from a 400 year old painting that Mona Lisa was 83 percent happy ,9 percent disgusted ,6 percent fearful ,and 2 percent angry .That just doesn't make any sense .You can usually tell what kind of emotion a person is feeling .Just by looking at a persons facial expression you can tell if someone is happy ,sad ,or mad .
On the other hand though this kind of technolgy could be useful .Here is how this program works .A computer constucts a 3-D model of the face ; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human msucles .The movement of one or more muscle is called an action unit .The computer detects 6 emotions happiness ,suprise ,anger ,disgust ,fear ,and sadness .
In everday life you can tell how a person is doing .Like if my friend walked up to me with his head down ,I can most likley tell ,that he is sad or angry .You can also tell persons emotion by looking at body movements something a computer can't do .
There is another benefit to this computer .If you are in class and you just have a blank stare the computer can tell if you are confused or bored .Then it could also modify the lesson .Another example is for online advertisment .If I see an ad that I like and I smile ,then I scroll down and see a similar ad ,but I frown ,it will change the ad just becuase I frowned .This is the same technology used in video games and video surgery .
In my opinion i dont think this kind technology would be valuable .It might not be accurate all the time and it would cost a lot of money .Instead of using this you can just look at a person and see there emotion . | 3 |
9c91080 | I feel that driverless cars could be both a harm and a help to people. What happens if one of those cars goes under a super malfunction or some of its safety units stop working for whatever reason and there is someone or multiple people in that certain car. But, then again they could prone some serious accidents and save a lot of lives. For example, the passage stated that the car is smart enough to know its limits on what it can and can't do. It also gives off certain signals to the driver such as vibrating seats to notify the driver that the vehicle is about to back into to something and flashing lights on the windshield. It even uses a camera to see that the driver is still alert and focused on the road.
So me personally, I wouldn't use a driverless car as an everyday get around car. I'd probably use it to go around the block or make a quick grocery run. | 2 |
9c9c75e | The author have lots of facts and I think he needs to add his ideas so people can see what he thinks. I think Venus is cool but I didn't know that it was that close to the planet Earth. I also feel like people dont find facts fun because people dont want to know all the fact. And I can see this could happen in like in 2040 or longer and if I would be alive I would not because it would be alote of money to go to a planet and I would miss the planet Earth.
Yes the author did support this idea but he could add more of his ideas because I dont really understand if you could live on it because how would you get food, water, pets and have fun on Venus. And people would also be mostlikey dupest and fat because people are not going to go outside to go play and you cant talk to enyone. And if the spacecraft was unmanned and for good reason then I dont think this is not going to happen eny time soon. | 1 |
9c9d14e | Hey everyone im a scientist from NASA and i believe that when aliens created the unmasking face on Mars.I've worked with NASA for over "Twenty years" and believed that the aliens did create the unmasking face of Mars.I have evidence that aliens did create the unmasking face of Mars."My evidence is one day i was working and we had a camera on Mars and we saw a shadow but it wasn't just your ordinary shadow, the shadow looked like an Egyptian Pharoh".My team and I created a film on the shadow that we saw, we also made books,magazines, and talkshows about the shadow.The name of the shadow was the alien artifact is what my team and i called it.I'll tell you something else about my work on the alien artifact it's not easy to target Cydonia.The most common are around the american west in the us."My team and I don't really fly over the face very often, my team and I noted".Thats the end of my story thanks for listening be sure to watch the film and read the book we would really appreciate. | 1 |
9ca1c60 | Using FACS to read the emotional state of students in a classroom is a bad idea. I think this because this technology has better uses and if a teacher can't tell if a student is bored or confused, they shouldn't be a teacher.
Beginning with, this technology has better uses. Reading a students facial expression seems like such a waste of so much potential. This technology could be out there in courtrooms detecting if someone is practicing perjury or something similar. This could be in interrogation rooms but not our personal devices.
Continuing with, if a teacher can't tell if a student is bored or confused, they shouldn't be a teacher. It is a teachers duty to know if a child is actually learning and if they don't know then they failed at their jobs. Teachers are who make us and if they can't tell that we aren't learning in a way that is beneficial to us, they don't deserve to be a teacher.
In conclusion, I think this because this technology has better uses and if a teacher can't tell if a student is bored or confused, they shouldn't be a teacher. | 2 |
9caac09 | The face on Mars was as national hit, it was every where, Tv shows, Talkshows, movies, even grocery stores. America just could not get enough of the Mask on Mars. Although there are many consperacy theorys, all have been proven wrong becasue it is just a heap of martian material. These theorys have been proven wrong by the pictures, the fact that the shadows give it the charectaristics of a face, and the reason it is not photographed much is not the Goverment, and N.A.S.A hiding proof of alien life. It is simply the fact that we do not pass the face often since 1976 when we first glimpsed the face, Alien existance theorys have spiraled into being both well know, and well conceived. The only problem with these ideas are that the pictures do not support those ideals. There are clear pictures that with out a doubt show no strange markings, or proof of an alien race. These picyures just show it how it is, A Messa.
Furthermore the face is just a large hill. The shadows, of some of the crevaces give off the apperance of being humanoid. Charectaristics such as eyes, nose, and even a mouth appear,but it simply a trick of the light.
As for the people who say Nasa is just "covering up" the fact that alien exist or have existend, are simply mistaken. The reason the Face is not often photographed is because we just do not passover the Face often. There is no alien life on Mars, or at least none that are affiliated with the Face.
In conclusion through the hard facts, and evidence of pictures, the shadows mistaken for human features, and the fact that our rover, and satalites just simply do not passover the Face often, support the fact the Face was not created by an alien race. Although the theorys are interesting, fun to look at and read it is important to know the truth. The Face is a messa, sitting on Mars, with slightly human like charactarisics. Charactaristics acheived due to shadows. | 3 |
9cac97c | Limiting the usage of cars has a varirty of advantages. From having a less expensive life, to less air pollution, and overall a generally happier life. Thinking about all the excess and stress that comes with owning a car is tiring. Not to mention the hazardous effect it had on our lives. Would it not be nice to just take off some of that burden off of you, and be a happier person?.Let me help you out on how to achieve that.
Owning a car is pricey! In Freiburg along with paying for your house you also have to pay for a parking garage, which comes with a hefty price. Did i not mention the distance you have to walk to park? lets just say you might as well have taken the bus."Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park---large garages at the edge of the development,where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home."(source one,section two). With you alone driving to work and back everyday will tally up to over a hundred dollars spent every week, now add children into it, and their after school ativities, also add emergencies. See where this is going? sure you might need a car now and then, having a car is not a bad thing. How about Carpooling? It will reduce that price you have on your gas recipts and create more time for bonding and interacting with people.
Health or driving? Well if you are not healthy you can not drive can you? With all of the automobiles we have today it is bound to affect the earth. The smog in the air leading to that first cough that can lead to something more terminal. Imagine what it would be like if you had less cars, or even no cars at all! well the capital of France tried it and the results were amazing."Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog.."(source two,section fourteen). Now think about if that ban that Paris enforced,was tried out in other countries. Just that little change in the amount of cars on the road let to that difference of the pollution. Probably led to a difference in someones health too.
Everything stated above leads to happiness, from the less expences that will have to be paid, and the less damage that the pollution will have on your health. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter"source one, section three).Also when there are less cars on the road your community will be able to connect more and have better infranstructure, which would make them happy just like it did for the people of Bogata, Columbia."Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks;rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic;and new resturants and upscale shopping districts have been cropped up."(source three,section twenty-eight).
Overall the advantages of limiting car usage has many benefits to it. From having a less expensive life, by not having to pay for gas so often, car insurance, and evrything else that comes with it. Having better health also is a advantage of the limitation of car usage. Also one of the most important aspects of life, happiness comes with the limitation of using cars. So there is no reason to not try it out, there will be more benefits. | 4 |
9cb54ea | In this argumentitive essay I am going to prove to you that this "face" is not a face but is a natuaral landform. When Nasa had first sent the Viking 1 out to space to photograph the planets "face" it had not very good cameras. This led to people like conspiricay theorists to believe that nasa had covered up the "face" and its proof of aliens as said in this qoute. " evidence that Nasa would rather hide from the public, says conspiracy theorists. the truth
is that nasa would have liked the proof of aliens because it would have made a huge boost in profit.
The second ship that nasa sent had the picture take in the winter on a cloudy martian day. This made people skeptical t believe nasa when the said that the face is not a face. This made nasa take another ship to the red planet and take photographs in the summer on a clear day.
The third and final ship sent was sent in 2001
had finaly proven to most people that this was indeed not a face. This did not shoot down the conspiricy theorists for they still believe that the face is
a face not
natural land form. This is proven in the last paragraph for the fact that they did not say if all people thought that it was a face or not a face. Also nasa could have changed the photos look with a bluring effect so that could have made it so
that it did not look like a face.
So in conclusion, all in all there is more evidence to discurage a face then there is to confirm it. | 2 |
9cb909d | The author supports the idea of studying Venus because Venus was the first chose of Earth before they discovered Earth . Also it could've been life since their is so much water their so it can support people way of living . Plus the planet has valleys , mountains, and craters just like Earth does . Including they are making sure that it is safe for humans to travel there . Also their would be more of a different type of lifestyle on Venus so humans on Earth can discover a new enviorment and world .
Venus is a different life upon humans . Extremely so that the technology we have today can out beat the technology from the 1800s or the 1940s . The calculations of a moder computer are powerful for the people NASA it's helps prevent any physical conditions that can happen to the travlers . Also the distance wouldn't be so bad for the people on Earth . Plus NASA is discovering on how to start life their for people who wants to start over again and be in a better year around world they can .
The author also thinks that the risks aren't very harmful to humans . Including since the sun is so close to Venus he discovered that there would be more better warmer days than winter days . Venus could be the next Florida for people who love to be warm . The author also states that Venus is a beautiful planet from just studying the features of it so why wouldn't it be beautiful to live on .
Venus oxygen also is better there yes there maybe a few storms but you'll never have to rely on trees for saving your life .
Venus also is the nearest option for a visit because if anything happen to Earth where would people go ? Venus of course because at this point the NASA people would have knowledge to know that the other world we have would be the next best place for us .Including the value of Venus is great because the farms that can be planeted their would be healiter foods for people . The water in Venus is safe and is not deadly for the travelers . Also it would be more cheaper and a better government there in Venus .
In conclusion Venus has so many great values and amazing different way to look at life it's self . Have a different type of lifestyle when you wake up in the morning . Including waking up to that nice hot weather and very sunny out . Also seeing different animals . Plus just having a better view at life . | 3 |
9cbb3ed | Venus is the second planet from the sun. Venus is also referred to as the Earths twin. The author of this article " The Challenge of Exploring Venus," has listed many ways that going to Venus could be good, but there are also reasons why it could be bad.
Some of the things that the author list are, Venus is very hard to get to and land on, sometimes Venus is colser to Earth and in that case that is when the spacecrafts get send there, and that it is a hard planet to study no matter how close it is. the author list both good and bad things about Venus. Temperatures can be about 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the pressure is 90 times grater then on Earth, humans could not survive that. Astronomers like Venus becaus it used to be the most Earth like planet, Venus used to have large oceans.
Venus may be a hard place to get too, it is not safe for people to be there long. if we could even land on Venus for more then a few minutes we could learn valuble thing about Venus and how it works. Venus has dangers but it would a big deal if we could learn more about the planet. | 2 |
9cbf6a3 | The author suggests that studing Venus is a worthy pursuit depite the dangers it presents. The author supported his idea of studying and understanding Venus can help us in many ways. Studying help will help us know more about Venus which will benefit in the future. And also maybe it will be the planet where it supported life.
The first reason why studying is Venus is a worthy is because Venus can be a very helpful planet for humanity. Venus can be a planet that is the most alike planet with Earth. According to the article, it says " Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system". This show that Venus can the next place like Earth and where human can life.
Second, if Venus is most Earth-like planet then it mean there are some feature or some landscape that are similar with Earth in Venus. This will help us because it similar to where we live right now. And it will can be the second planet to live for us. According to the the text, is says "Lang ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth". This show that
like Earth, Venus could have supported life.
The author also talk about how Venus has some feature that are similar to Earth. How it has similar faetures like valleys, mountains, and craters. And also talk about the nearest option for a planerty visit. According to the article, " Today, Venus still had some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Futhermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel". This mean that Venus is very silimar to Earth and worth studying.
In conclusion, the author supports the his idea of studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger in many ways. He talk about how the Venus might have been the most Earth-like planet. How Venus might have covered with oceans and might have supported life. And the features that Venus have that are similar to Earth. This shows that Venus is worth studying despite the dangers. | 3 |
9cc2227 | In the United States, democracy is advertised as a method of acheiving selections, though this is unfortunantly not the case. In the United States, we, as individuals, are not permitted to a "fair" or equal opportunity of voting systems. Vote should be popular, the will of the people of the nation, though through the Electoral College, the people is denied.
Voting is, as far as common sense goes, the majority rule. The Electoral College voting system was established during the creation of the Constitution in order to secure a "qualified vote"- an effort to diminish the will of the lesser, or unknowing. Arguably, it is stated that, "..the most thoughful voters should be the ones to decide the election", or in other words the statement can easily be translated to "we do not wish a nation of idiotic voters to decide our president", each individual of the nation is mindful of others and care enough to express their opinion, as it is known a is a citizens duty to vote. A duty that must be followed. In any effort to simplify this, a voter is a voter. They are all "qualified". If a person cares enough about their nation to cast a ballot, without requirment, they certainly are qualified.
Now that the qualifications are established, the electors within the Electoral College are free to do as they wish. Waving a magic wand, the support of others is unimportant now, and they pull whatever they desire out of the hat, as written by Bradford Plumer, "Consider that state legislatures are technically responsiblefor picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people". What happened to majority rule? People should have the direct vote of presidential candidate, however we are faced with shocking facts such as the house selection rarely dispalying the correct majority rule, "The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe".
The dispicable system was established long ago for an extremely specific purpose with specific issues, which is no longer the case today. In the United States, we are not a democracy. We are a Republic. Ridiculusly, voters do not control the election in our Republic, as shared,"...over sixty percent of voters would prefer a direct election". Can those expect change? Ironically, no. The system would most like not allow that, and those mindful citizens would need to hope for a glance at serendipity. | 5 |
9cc5892 | Venus is one of the most closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, it has provide a very challenging place to examine more closely. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmosphere pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth.
Venus has the hottest surface temperature of temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional imediments like urupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it mat well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life. Venus still has some features that are analogous, the planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Venus can be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel.
NASA has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would
allow scientists to float above the fray.
Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans.
Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to llast long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. Some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide hace been tested in chamber simulathing the chaos of Venus's surface. | 1 |
9cc61ec | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both posotive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I am personally against driverless cars. One reason that I am against driverless cars is that drivers could get distracted and not pay attention to the road. Secondly, what if there is an accident who is to take the blame the driver or the manufactioner. Also there are many saftey concerns with driverless cars.
Firstly, driverless cars can cause drivers to get distracted. One way they can cause drivers to become distracted is that drivers could think that because the car is driving by its self that they do not have to pay attention to the road, when they shouuld be. Secondly, driverless cars may cause drivers to be more tempted text while driving. Although, the cars come with built in saftey alerts what if the driver does not notice them. In the article paragraph eight states "the psychological aspects of automation are really a challenge," admits Dr. Wener Huber, a BMW project manager driver" , it also says that they would have to find away to keep drivers focused and make driving fun.
Secondly, what would happen if there where to be an accident in
a driverless car and someone where to be injured. Who would take the blame? The driver or the manufactioner of the car.
Would you want to take that risk. In paragraph nine it says that "new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident.
Finally, what about all of the saftey concerns that come with driverless cars. With all of this extra technology being put into the car you will have to wonder if there will still be room for all of the standard safter requirements. Also what is to happen if one of the sensors controling the car fails and does not alert the driver in time to move out of the way of a possible accident. In paragraph four it states that the driverless car can "mimic" the skills of a human at the wheel, however the human response time could be faster and more effective than that of a machine. Some people may even use driverless cars as a reason to drive or get behind the wheel while they are under the influince of drugs or alchol, which can be a majopr concern to yhemselves and other drivers on the road.
In conclusion although driverless cars maybe an amazing thing to imagine or dream about I do not think that is the way we should head for thr future. Driverless cars may cause drivers to become distracted behind the wheel. Also, who is toi take the blame if there is an accident in a driverless car. People may become to reliable and dependent on the car to drive them that they will not be prepared to stop an accident from happening. Finally driverless cars could be a huge saftey concern to drivers. Driverless cars may also help to be an excuse for people to drive under the influence, text, or even sleep while behind the wheel. I am against driverless cars and think that they should not be a main source of traansportation in years to come. | 4 |
9cc68b6 | Venus is like earth with just worser conditions to living. It's the closet planet to earth in terms of density and size. Studying Venus isn't easy. You can not really sample things on the ground there, that's why NASA is trying to come up with new inventions to help us study Venus.
Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because if you meet the challenge presented by Venus you see the value of it, it will lead human curiosity into many equally intimidating endeavors.
In paragraph 4 the text states " Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth " this meaning that back then Earth and Venus were some what the same even to now they still are. Venus can be sometimes be the nearest option visit for a planetary visit. When NASA sends humans to study Venus they face hostile conditions on the surface of Venus, and if they go Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray. It wont be easy conditions but it is survivable for hor humans. It is good and bad because they are hovering over the ground safetly but at the same time they cant take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance. Due to trying to study more on Venus, NASA is working on other ways to approach studying Venus.
This is how it is when NASA tries studying for Venus, it's hard for them because when Venus is sometimes around the corner ( in space terms ),humans have sent numerous spacecrafts to land. No spacecraft sruvived the landning for more then a few hours. But hopefully they come out with successful ways to study Venus one day. | 3 |
9cd5951 | In many cases there is two sides to an arguement. When there is two sides to an arguement it could go either way. In this case the arguement is about the electoral college. What is the electoral college,it is the the process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the consitution as a compromise between election of president by a vote in congress and election of presidentby popular vote of qualilfied citizens.(stated in paragraph 1) I believe strongly that we should keep the electoral college, beacuse it keeps people from directly voting for a presdient,keeps everything even and mostlikely fair. Most people think that we should get rid of the electoral college,its clearly a state of opinion.
When you really sit down and think about how most people vote in the Northeast and South they are not the thoughtful voters. (said in paragraph 19 line 2 paragraph 4) Take obama for an example, he was the first black presidental canidate and most of the darker skined group of people got excited because for the first time in history a black man could be president,many blacks thought that voting for the black president would mean that they would better respersatition in office,so many blacks and some whites voted for obama to win. Not really paying much attention to what or who they were voting for. Which you could probably figure out that obama won they had the bigger vote. If we are able to keep the electoal college it would mean that wouldnt happen agian because it could go through the electorals they would choose who is best. Dont get me wrong people actually voted for obama anyways ,because of what he stood for but most didn't.
In reality most people think that the voting is unfair, like what happened with Presidnet Kennedy. Kennedy was the stronger, better canidate to be president. I believe that the electors chose right, it may not have been who the people wanted. He was way better then Nixon could ever be. That may have made the people very mad,which led to the assination of President Kennedy. Kenndey changed the country and to this day in my mind, known as one of the best presdidents we ever had. Thanks to the electoral system we had Kennedy elected instead of Nixon,could you just imagine how the country would be today. If Kennedy didnt win,or if Nixon was president just one little thing could change everything. Everything happens for a reason and having the electoral college helps. I know that Nixon has the popular vote but kennedy needed to win for the better of our country,its my state of opinion.
Most people think that having the electoral college is bad,why? because they believe that the people should be able to vote directly. I understand how and why they believe that. When you think about votin directly it would insure the people that whoever they are voting for they would be sure to get thier votes and for sure get the president that they wished to be president. I could truley undertsand why and this would work out, but i still strongly believe that this could be the cause to many problems.
In conclusion,I beleive that we shoudl keep the electoral college becaue he keeps the people for choosing a president direlcetly. If they make a bad chose someone,who knows is the better canidate that they could over rule the peoples vote. So it would all fair in most turns and would possibably helping the country,and many people believe otherwise its truely a state of opinion. You choose who chooses the president. | 3 |
9cd6ef9 | Driverless cars have both their prositives and negatives. The idea that cars will be use half of the fuel today is good thing for air pollution and that they will offer more flexibility than a bus is also. Some negatives would include that they will invade your privacy and that traffic laws might not advance as the car industry does.
Cars will use "half the fuel of today's taxis". This would be a positive because then there will be less air pollution. A person that is part of the fuel industry might bring up the fact that with that the fuel economy will start to decrease. There will not be much profit and that will not be good for them. Driverless cars will "offer more flexibility than a bus". This would be good for people that need to get to work fastser or get somewhere else faster. Buses have to make stops as they go whereas this car would not. Sergey Brin "beleives such cars would fundamentally change the world.
These driverless cars could potentially use "cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver." This idea would leave drivers with very less privacy in these cars. You will not know when you are being watched. One other big negative part of driverless cars is that they traffic laws might not advance along with the cars. In order for all of this to work out you would need for everyone to work along.
Driverless cars may be the future that people will have to adapt to. Many people play a vital role in this because many things will have to change. I think that they should not be the future because I do not like the idea that they will invade privacy. You will not know who is watching you at any given time. You will not know if you are even being watched. This can make drivers feel as if they are not being trusted. Some people may disagree with that because after all it does have many postive aspects. | 3 |
9cd87c2 | Have you ever been upset, but not wanted anyone to know? Well having this type of technology exploits personal feelings without consent. It can be a valuable peice if used correctly. Overall though, I think we should keep this technology away from classrooms.
For starters, a persons feelings and emotions is his or her buisness. Giving a computer the option to read us like a book and evaluate us is something that just wouldn't make much difference. We are human beings, we have feelings and if we wanted someone else to know we would tell them. We show emotions how we see fit, it's just what we do.
A computer does not need to do that for us.
Secondly, every single human on this earth is different. How could one machine read every emotion? I know for sure that my happy face is not the exact same to another. My surprised face could by their happy face, and the opposite aswell. No two are alike in this world, they're will always be a biased factor in this technology. Which is why we cannot rely on technology everyday, some things are better face to face.
On the other hand, having this added onto a online school, or even on some online learning website could help. As it could change the lesson if it senses boredom or confusion. In paragraph 6, it states that exact message, Dr. Huang says "A classroom computer could regongnize when a student is becoming confused or bored". Which in all ways could be a great addition, but if you take into consideration all the cons. That one pro just isn't enough. We have amazing teachers who have the same possibility to bring classroom joy, we don't need computers for that.
In Conclusion, this product is one that could potentially change the online world and maybe even schooling. If in the right environment though, we don't need it. We have an amazing staff in all schools working around the clock to make sure kids learn what they need to succeed in life. Students will express emotions, and when they feel they need help they'll l have all the counselors and friends needed. We don't need a computer for that. | 4 |
9cdbfeb | I don't really like the idea of driverless cars. They are just not specific with a lot of things and I don't like it there not be specific with all the cars and what kind. They are not telling me which companies they are from on some of the cars. They are not telling us what the car's companies are or like what kind of cars they are.
They are telling us about sensors and things like that but not the specifics and I need to know the specifics of all the cars not just one. Atleast all of these cars have negativety and has bad things to do with them but this driverless cars article is not telling me that. They are not talking about the gas mileage either and we need to know about the gas. You can't test computer driven cars it is illegal.
I don't agree on this driverless cars passage and im not learning anything about these cars. They don't have the specifics and what the gas mileage of the car is and the simple things like that. You need to know a lot of things about these cars or you will either wreck your car is something bad is going to happen to where it blows up or anything like that so you have to know the specifics about your car or all cars. Some cars will change people's life and some of these cars these days will change the world. People actually need cars these days that's why I disagree with this article and I couldn't imagine a lot of people walking it just couldn't happen people would need cars they would not be walking. | 2 |
9cde242 | Dear Mr. Senator,
I have decided to express my opinon to you about the Electoral College process for electing the President of the United States. This process should be abolished as soon as possible for it is corrosive to the American peoples opinon. We should instead switch to a popular vote by eligble American citizens to decide presidency.
Now some fellows might argue that the Electoral College is favored by the people. When in fact, as Bradford Plumer points out in paragraph 9, "60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now". Some people may also say that the Electoral college ecourages the president to visit all states, when in fact smaller states still are not treated the same as states with more electoral votes. A president would rather spend their time investing and giving information to a state such as Californa who have 55 electoral votes, who feel more inclined to think about their decision due to their involvement, rather than a state with 3 electoral votes who dont invest as much thought into their votes.
In grade school we are taught that popualer votes most accurately represent what a specific population wants, why dont we use it in the real world? If your princible wanted to figure out what color the students wanted their yearbooks, she would not elect people to decide for each class! In the Bush and Gore election, Bush recived less votes by the American people but won presidency because he accuired more Electoral votes than Gore. That means that more American people wanted Gore, but the fate was chosen by 271 people, who selected Bush as the winner!
The Electoral College also increases the risk of a tie and if one occured, the election would be disrupted by the unorderly process of which we would have to take to decide the president. In 1968, a change of votes from just 41,971 people would have tied the electoral votes due to the even number of 538 Electors.
The overall idea im trying to express is that the Electoral College is a poor way to show peoples opinon, and much rather focuses on that of 270 individuals who in the end, decide the President of the United States. I hope you can see my points and I long for the day when the president is decided by the people. | 4 |
9cec5ca | The author supports the idea that Venus is worthy to pursuit despite the dangers by telling us several things. That this is our neighboring planet, by showing us that we need to expand ourselves and explore, and by telling us that Venus is as close as a sister planet could come to Earth.
One reason the author tells us we should examine Venus further is by telling us how close this planet is to us. Venus, like Mars, is our neighboring planet. In the text, it says "These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus." Since Venus is so close, the author tells us that we should be exploring it. Another piece of text evidence is "Because Venus is sometimes right around the cornerin space terms..." The author tells us again how close Venus is to us. The risk here includes getting a shuttle close enough that could be of help to us. "More importantly, researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance." This evidence tells us that even if we were to get close to Venus, we couldn't take samples with our technology the way it is now. We would have to develope better technology. This evidence further shows how the author thinks that it is worthy to pursuit Venus, despite the dangers.
Another reason the author implores us to keep exploring Venus despite the risks is that we need to expand our horizons beyond one planet. The author supports this in his concluding sentence "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." This shows how the author wants to push on rather than to simply settle where we are, despite the risks. The author also states how exploring another planet would help further understanding on Earth as well; "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." The author is saying that if we don't explore Venus now, what will we do in similar situations when the oppurtunity presents itself? To sum up this paragraph, the author supports the idea that we should examine Venus despite the risks by showing Earth needs to expand its horizons.
The third reason why the author wants us to explore Venus is that it has come as close as any planet in our solar system to Earth. In the article, the author calls Venus our twin or our "sister planet" what he means by this is that Venus was once very similar to Earth. In the text, it says "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The author tells us that Venus could have supported life at one point. Another piece of textual evidence is "Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable," the author shows us that Venus would be a prime target to try and explore because of how close it is to Earth. The author is explaining that Venus, being so close, could potentially have alot of crucial information about life.
To conclude this essay, the author supports the idea that we should explore Venus, despite the risks in three ways. By telling us that Venus is our neighboring planet, by showing that we need to expand ourselves and explore, and by telling us that Venus is as close as a sister planet could come. These reasons are how the author supported his idea. | 4 |
9cf0187 | "HONK! BEEP BEEP!." "Hey! What are you doing!? You're causing a traffic jam!" What causes a traffic jam? Cars. They get us from point A to B for sure but, do we really need to rely on them that often? I don't think so. As we limit our car usage, the air pollution lowers, fewer car accidents happens, and road rage? Gone.
Limiting car usage have many benitfits, such as the air pollution lowers. In some countries, for example Paris, they ban driving due to smog. fter near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the gobal city. As of that Monday, they would fine motorists with even-numbered license plates a 22-euro fine($31). The effect of this was that public transit was free of charge from Friday to Monday.
In Bogota, Colombia, millions of Colombians participated in a car-free day leaving the streets traffic jam free. It was their third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted. It didn't stop people from participating even though gray clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" said a businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bike with his wife. This campaign began back in the mid-1990s. Without cars, parks and sports centers have bloomed throughtout the city. They even fixed the uneven pitted sidewalks and replaced them with smooth sidewalks. A city of 7 million, rush hour have dramatically cut traffic as they have their car-free day.
As for the United States, President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions. Recent studies shows that Americans are buying fewer cars and getting fewer licenses as each year go by. Another study has shown that there has been a large drop in the percentage of 16- to 39 year-olds getting a license, while older people are likely to retain their licenses as they age, Mr. Sivak's research has found. Without cars, people are expected to walk more and car pool with friends or take buses. This will dramatically decrease greenhouse gas and air pollution. In Barcelona, Spain, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Moter Company, has laid out a bussiness plan where they create cities in which pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and impove safety.
In conclusion, by not driving a car, air pollution lowers, fewer car accidents happen, and no traffic jams. From different sources, different effects happens when cars are banned. In Paris, smog is a thing in the past, no traffic jam for a city of 7 million in Bogota, and in Barcelona, public transportations are connected and is faster to get to point A to point B. By not driving cars, we won't cause car accidents and it will improve safety for everyone. Walking never cause problems and can get you anywhere. | 2 |
9cf3904 | lukes partipation in the seagoing cowboys program allowed him to experience adventures and visit unique places. Ithink others should go join the seagoing cowboys program. The text states " it was 1945 world war II was over in Europe,and many contries where left in ruins. The text also states that " to help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA .
Luckes claims helped me choose to convine people to join the seagoing cowboys program by you get to see all the historical places and get to see whats left in ruins. in the text he also knew it is a chance of a lifetime that he'll never get again. the details from the article that supports lukes claims are " Helping out on his aunt katie's farm as a boy prepared luke for hard work. "But not for the dangers at sea".
People who think that they should not convince ohers to join is because they think that they would be away from their family's for a long period of time. And it's a lot of hard work. these people dont know the good it will do thecountry. And the people who really need help. they dont want to help out other people.
In conclusion i would convince people to join the seagoing cowboys program. I have stated that a its a once in a life time chance to have. Also they could help out other people by doing so. And you'll be aware about others people's needs despite your own. So i would convience others to join. | 2 |
9cf3e02 | We live in a world where we can see and talk to someone through a tiny screen, even though they are halfway across the world. We live in a world where tiny robots can act and do anything we want, with just a click of a button. Now we live in a world where we have the ability to detect every single feeling a person is expressing, even when they are trying to hide their emotions. FACS (Facial Action Coding System) is brand new technology that allows us to detect accurate and precise emotions of others. What does this mean for the future?
FACS is the newest Facial innovation that allows us to read the most hidden emotions. "Prof. Thomas Huang, of the Beckman institute for Advanced Science and Prof. Nicu Sebe of the University of Amsterdam." Introduced this new and advanced technology. Huang and Sebe are always finding better ways for computers and humans to interact. Have you ever spoken to someone who was just a blank slate; no emotion, no expession, nothing? Facial Action allows us to dig deeper and help those who have trouble expressing emotions with the people they interact with everyday. Secondly, have you ever gone to the doctor and didn't know how to explain how you felt? With FACS we can now detect feelings in which we can't explain maybe even feelings we don't want to explain.
With this kind of advanced technology one must be careful. Is it not always the best choice to see what others are feeling, maybe they simply don't want help or want others to know what they are feeling. For example, when asked the following question; if you could pick any superpower what would you pick? Most would say super strength, super speed etc. One might even say the ability to read minds. But after given that ability, some might want to reverse the clock. When we are given high technology or "superpowers" we have to keep in mind the risk of such information. We may learn things we never wanted to learn or things we should have never come in contact with.
Every new technology that the world presents has pros and cons; but our job is to be able to weigh out these conditions so that everyone is happy with the outcome. Just because something benefits one human that doesn't mean it can benefit everyone it comes in contact with. For when given great power comes great responsibilty. | 3 |
9cf7dd7 | Oveall the author does a good job of supporting their claim that Venus is worth studying. The author shows this through; giving reasons that make exploring Venus worth doing, by providing information that is relevant to the topic and claim, and by providing solutions to problems involving the exploration of Venus.
In paragraph four it the author presents its reasons that make exploring Venus something worth doing. The author states how "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This information if further made relevant through the authors explanation on how this leads scientists to beleive that Venus could have once supported life. The section then goes on to give examples of how similar the surface of Venus is geoloigcally, to Earths.
Through out the entire article the author presents relevant information to each section presented. An example would be the entirity of paragraphs two and three. Both sections provide background information that most readers wouldn't be familiar with. This allows the reader to be further familiarized with the topic and more able to make opinions and conclusions to the authors statement.
The author provides solutions to the problems that are presented with the exploration of Venus. Among those probelms are the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than that of Earth and the surface temperature can average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. This prevents any direct human exploration, this is solved through an idea that was presented by NASA that the author gives in paragraph five. "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 miles or so above the rolling Venusian landscape." The conditions at that high would be "around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth."
The author was able to easily prove their point in a manner that was easy for the reader to understand, this made it easy to understand the point of the article. Through reasons for exploration, relevant information, and solutions to problems the author formed a well made and intelligent article and point. | 4 |
9cff5ed | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because that is what Venus is - a different, wonderful place to study, but has dangers we do not face on Earth. In the text the author states, "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encount on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of pur oceans and would liquefy many metals." This piece of information from the text is saying that here on Earth we have humans diving into the deepest parts of the oceans, with protective gear (a submarine), to explore the unknown. However, if we would to send a human to Venus, with protective gear ( a spaceship), they would not surive because the heat Venus has melts metals and would destroy the spaceship. The author then states, "Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." In this piece of text the author is stating that yes, even though Earth has volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and lighting we do not have those weather conditions because someone is trying to study the Earth. That piece of information is saying that if we were to send a spaceship out to Venus it would be impossible for it to land because Venus has volcanes, powerful earthquakes, and lighting strikes to prevent probes from landing on its surface. It is clear to see that Venus does not want anyone on its home. As the author states, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." Sciencetists want to know more about a planet that could've been Earth hunderds of years ago, but at what cost? Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system (paragraph 3) to the point if we do send a team up there their protective gear will be melted not to metion maybe even they would be melted too. Venus' weather is almost like a sercuity guard. The weather is literally trying to stop probes from landing on its surface - erputing volcanoes, powerful earthquaked, and frequent lighting strikes (paragraph 3). Maybe studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents, but if you ask me maybe Venus just wants to be left alone and just be another planet we don't bother. | 3 |
9cffcca | The Face on Mars is a natural landform made of huge rocks. There is no such thing as aliens people just started a story or rumor about living human beings on mars with green flesh and a big oval head and small body. They even took closer pictures of it to find out what it really was and went slower by it to get a better angle an view and it was no living creature.
People who heard about the face on mars assumed it was aliens because of what people told them instead of listening to NASA and what they had to say about it. Even a few scientists believed the face was an alien artifact. So on April 5, 1998, when Mars global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time ever Michael Malin and his (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos.
But not everyone was satisfied with the pictures because the face on mars is located 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was April '98 a cloudy time of year so they went took it again April 8, 2001 a cloudless day in Cydonia and they took pictures very close up. And what the picture actually shows is the Martin equivalent of a butte or mesa. | 2 |
9d00ea1 | Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size. Venus is a planet in the solar system, it is the second planet from the sun. It has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely. Venus is often referred to as Earth's twin, Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planetory neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds. a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfric acid in venus's atmosphere.
The difference in speed means that sometimes we are closer to mars and other times to venus. Because Venus is something right around the corner in the space terms human have sent numerous space craft to land on the cloud-draped world. No space craft survived the landing for more than hours. Beyond high pressure and heat, venusian geology and weather present earthquakes, amd frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on it's surface. Venus has the hotest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though mercury is closer to our sun.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particular compelling idea for sending human to study venus. NASA's posible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the frays. Srriving to meet our challenge presented by venus has a big value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human currosity will likely lead us into manequally. | 1 |
9d04ae1 | When you see this face like formation what do you think? Aliens, rocks, sand? Well if you thought any of those it would be rocks and sand. Some people actually beleived this was made by extra terrestrials on Mars but no it's not This is just a rock formation found by NASA who thought at first it might have been an extra terrestrail creation.
This is not an alien creation if it were there would be arms, legs, or maybe a body poking out of the sand and rocks. But if it is something we probably wont know for another century or a few decades. But if there is extra terrestrial life on Mars we won't know for a very long time. If aliens did create this then where are they, did they just leave Mars or get wiped out. If this was created by aliens they should still be on Mars or at least signs of them should still be there.
The face still kind of looks like a face in 2001 even though it show sand and maybe thats a little mountain. but it still oddly resembles a face. There might be other stuff like this on Mars in uninvestigated areas and maybe one or two have been made by aliens or other life. We found water on Mars so something had to have inhabitted Mars atr least once. Maybe mars was like Earth at one point in time and there was extra terrestrial life on Mars but something made them leave and made Mars just a floating sandy rock in space. But the face that they found on Mars was just a mesa, but who knows this could be some crazy alien statue buried underground we won't know for a while though. | 2 |
9d04b4e | The " Unmasking the Face on Mars" was NOT created by Aliens. The Face on Mars is just a natural landform. It's just a natural landform because the Face on Mars looks just like a natural face, there is no eveidence that Aliens have been on the planet Mars, and some Scientist from
NASA is only saying its an alien artifact because it'll benefit NASA in the long run.
The Face on Mars looks just like a natural face. Also, its just a natural landform. In paragraph 3, it restates, "huge rock formaton . . . which resembles a human head . . .." The illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth, which was created by shadows. So, the Face on Mars has human characteristics.
NASA is only saying its life, and also saying the face was created by Aliens because itll benefit them in the long run. In paragraph 3 it even says, " The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars." Then in paragraph 4 it restates, "It certainly did!" Meaning, the engagemnet to the public and on Mars worked. Now, that NASA discovered the Face on Mars, it has become a pop icon, starred in Hollywood films, and ETC.
There is no evidence that Aliens have been on the Planet Mars. It says the Face on Mars resembles a rock formation. Then. the shadows gave it eyes, nose, and a mouth. It says nothing about
Aliens creating the Face . Although few scientist believe the Face was an alien artifact, many still believed it was a real Human Face.
When, the MOC team snapped a picture . . . thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a website called JPL. The JPL website revealed a natural landform. Finally, there was no alien monument after all.
In conclusion, The Face on Mars is a just a natural landform. First, The Face on Mars looks just like a natural face, there is no evidence that aliens have been on the Planet Mars, and NASA is only saying the face was created by aliens beacuse it'll benefit them in the long run. So. there is no way Aliens could have possibly created The Face on Mars. What do you think ? | 3 |
9d05411 | Can I imagine a world with driverless cars? Yes, I can. Do I think they are a smart idea? No, I do not. I do think there are definitely some pros, but the cons are greater. They could have a glitch, cause accidents, and lose control.
I don't think they are a smart invention because they could glitch. What I mean by they could glitch is, they could just stop driving for you without you knowing and die on you. Possibly causing you to crash. Therefore, it is not safe.
Another reason I don't think they are smart is they could lose control. Yes, they do warn you when you need to take over, as it says in paragraph 7 of the article. But, what if you don't hear it? Or, it stops working and it doesn't let you know you need to take over? What are you supposed to do then?
The last reason I think the driverless cars are not smart is they could cause lots of accidents. Yes, normal cars have accidents as well
but I think driverless car accidents would be much worse. They would be worse because of all the computer pieces working in such a big device could cause it to possibly blow up, causing all othe surrounding cars to overheat and blow up themselves, the car could lose control an crash into another car.
Also, the car could also malfunction and do the opposite of what you want it to do. With a normal car, you are in control. So, most of these things are less likely to happen.
Now that I have shared my opinion with you, what do you think? Do you think they're a good invention? In paragraph 8 of the article, it even says safety is their biggest concern. So, what do you think? | 3 |
9d0baaf | I feel like we shouldn't have driverless cars for many reasons. There are already many accidents about people falling asleep behind the wheel, having driverless cars just makes it easier for collisions. If you were behind the wheel of a driverless car then you can easily get too relaxed and end up falling asleep, What if there's an emergeny and you can't wake up for a response in time?
There's some good reasons too. Such as if you were at a party and there was drinking. You can rely on the car to get you home safely. The car can keep you out of harm by you not driving.
All together I find it a bad idea. We do't have much research on driverless cars and we are not skilled enough to create them to be able to drive on the road. We don't have enough research to do this because what if there is a bug in the system, the car can easily break down or it can go rogue and you can be put in a lot of danger. So yes, I find it a bad idea to have them, but it could be in the future. | 2 |
9d0d0ae | Join the Seagoing Cowboys Program
I'm Luke Bomberger I am part of the Seagoing Cowboys program. I think you should join too. Here are some resons why I think you should join the program. It's fun, you do a lot of activities such as baseball, vollyball, table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading and, whittling on the way back. You play the games where the animals used to be.
You also get to see a lot of wonderful places. I've traveled to China and Europe. I saw the Acropolis in Greece, I took a gondola ride in Venice, Italy where the streets were water, I've toured an excavated castle in Crete, and saw the Panama Canal on my way to China. We actually do have time to see places on our way to places.
It opens the world up to you. It's a life changing opportunity. I'm very gratefull I have that opportunity. It made me more aware of the countries in need and that awareness has always sayed with me. That is why I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. | 2 |
9d104b5 | Have you ever thought about what life would be like on Venus? Venus, also known as the "Evening Star", is said to be a challenge when it comes to exploring. The author develops a main point that Venus is a fasinating planet by using facts on past explorations to Venus, by using what scientist have found, and by telling readers that our travels should not be stopped.
First of all, Venus, also known to be Earths "twin", is a mystery. The author tells the readers about what past explorations have been like and why no one is living or has traveled to Venus in almost three decades. ""Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours.". The author also tells of why no space craft has been able to survive the landing on Venus. "Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun.". However that does not stop scientist from trying to create more explorations to gain more research.
In addition to the surface being inhospitable, that does not stop scientist from planning more explorations to gain more research. The author asks us, "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientist even disscusing further visits to its surface?". Well we are told that, "Today Venus still has some features that are analogous tgo thoses on Earth.". Which tells us that even scientist are still figuring out how Earth became Earth, and if Venus was just like Earth. Which leads to more research and more information.
Finally, we are told about how a-like Earth and Venus are through the research of the scientists. Which scientist believe we should not stop our travels just because of dangers. In paragraph 8 the author states, " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.". This shows that the author does not believe that the danger should hold us back and stop us from exploring. In the same paragraph it also states, "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation."
Over all, the author develops a main point that Venus is a fasinating planet by using facts on past explorations to Venus, by using what scientist have found, and by telling readers that our travels should not be stopped. By showing the readers that there is more than what meets the eye when talking about Venus. Also that one should never let danger stop them from exploring. | 4 |
9d17f4f | The idea of an autonomous car is very interesting but it should not be developed into an actual product. Though there are a few luxuries that come with an autonomous car there are quite a few more liabilities that come with it. The following are just some of the issues that could come up with the driverless car.
The first issue that could come about with these driverless cars is their reliance on absolute perfect conditions. The cars that they have tested needed to be put on a special test course to be used. These roads were nearly perfect roads unlike the roads that we drive on every day. To make this car street legal they would have to make major upgrades to the current roads and that would be way too expensive for the government to do. This is just too expensive to be a feasible idea.
The next issue that may possibly occur is legal disputes. If a car is not being controlled by the human inside of it and it crashes in to another car who is at fault for the wreck? That question will lead into a lot of legal disputes involving the cars if the technology fails. There will be owners who blame the manufacturer for the wreck because they made the technology that failed. They could also blame the driver in the car because they were not paying enough attention to take control of the car and prevent the accident from happening.
The third and final issue is the fact that the cars are not truly driverless. These cars are advertised as self driving cars but in reality they still require a driver. This will problems because if the technology fails and does not alert the driver when they need to to control of the car it could lead to accidents and possibly even deaths. Even if the technology does not fail the slightest of delays when sending a warning that they need to take control of the car could result in an accident or maybe even death. This ties in with the previous point about the legal liabilities that come with the driverless cars.
Overall the autonomous cars are a fascinating idea and one that many people may support but in reality they are a legal liability and they would cost a lot of money and possibly cause accidents or even deaths due to a failure or delay in the cars system that lets the driver know when to take control of the car. | 4 |
9d1a448 | Being a person of politics yourself, you of all people should know that many compromises have been made over the course of the establishment of the United States. However, some of the compromises, like the electoral college, were made because of factors in the past and are now not needed in today's modern democracy. While the electoral college once worked as a compromise in the past, it is an archaic system that unfairly represents the votes of citizens all across the nation. A popular vote should instead be utilized to fairly choose the people of power in this country and would better represent voters' opinions.
In implementing the electoral college, most states' votes either go to one candidate or the other, leading to candidates to only campaign in swing states (Bradford Plumer 13). This may not seem like much of a problem, but consider this: a swing state such as Florida with over 20 electoral votes could go to a candidate who could have won by a 51 to 49 percent margin. This means that all the voters who voted for the other candidate no longer count, making the electoral college ineffective at voicing the opinions of the populous. Also, many states may not even see the future president at all, like in the 2000 election where the candidates did not even go once and talk in seventeen states. This leads to a poor democracy because voters in these states will surmise that if the president will not bother to visit their state, they shouldn't bother on making an educated decision when voting, or may choose to not vote at all. In a election by popular vote, presidents will have to make greater strides in getting the people's votes and citizens will then have more of an impetus in learning more about their country's government and politics.
With the Electoral College, there is also the risk that electors may not necessarily vote for the candidate the people want as president. In the Electoral College, "voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president" (Bradford 10). These electors may not necessarily vote for what candidate voters want most as president, and could do what they might feel is the best decision; however, this is not always what the majority of voters want in a president and could end up with a poor president. In addition, most voters know very little about how these electors are chosen and are not in control of who their state's electors are. In a way this system is a bit corrupt, because the voters don't have the final say of the president.
In addition, a tie is likely in an electoral vote because of swing states, which has the potential to lead to a disaster. If two candidates receive the same number of electoral votes and tie in an election, the House of Representatives then chooses the president, while the Senate choose the vice president, but their votes may not show who voters want as president, seeing that voters often vote one party for president while the other for their representatives (Plumer 12). The vote for president is distributed unevenly, and states with many voters will only be represented by one vote. this could lead to the House of Representatives choosing a president that is only liked by a small population and this cannot easily be undone. Swing states are the only thing that can cause or prevent a tie in elections, and a tie has almost occured in 1976 in Hawaii and in 1968 in Ohio.
Those in favor of the electoral college argue that because candidates will focus on swing states in order to win voters in those states will pay closer attention to the election and make a more educated decision (Richard A. Posner 20). However, this is not necessarily the case, and there are plenty of other well-educated voters in other states who have opinions that will never be counted because of the electoral college. If the popular vote becomes the new method in choosing the president, voters all across the nation will pay more attention to elections because they feel that their vote can make a difference, and it will. This will in turn increase the number of voters actively paying attention to their country's decisions. Because of the Electoral College, "about one-half the eligible American population did vote in [2012's] election" (Posner 23). Although this number is mentioned as a success in Posner's arguement, this means that there is one-half of American voices left unheard. Democracy only works if all citizens vote, but they will only take the time to vote if they know that they can make a difference.
Change needs to happen and it has to soon. If not, a poor president could be elected and then who knows what bad things could happen? With the popular vote, more people will be heard, and they will better take part in their country's government, leading to a better nation. | 6 |
9d1af92 | There are many things up in Mars. Some , well many, that we do not even know about. Now many believe the face on Mars was created my aliens. But, how could it be so? Well, because it was not.
First of all how could have the aliens created an artifact. How they create it as a form of a face. It's not like aliens just have tools laying around and they sculpt when they are bored. It started to form over the years. The way it was forming and the shadows around it just made it look more of a face.
With all honesty do you not think if NASA was 100% sure this "face" was created by aliens they would've announced it? That would have been big proof that aliens do exist. After all scientists have been trying to look for any other life on other planets for over the years. So that just says NASA also sees it as just a natrual landform.
The face on Mars is became very popular. But not in the scientist type way. It has become a pop icon. It has starred in a Hollywood film,appeared in books, magazines,radio talk shows, even haunted grocery store checkout likes for 25 years. Peopl seem to find it interesting since they are talking and mentioning it alot. I am thinking they just seem to find it interesting that aliens might have created it.
I think it is safe to say that the face on Mars is just a natrual landform. NASA thinks that, so maybe we shoud too. After all they are scientist and part of NASA that knows all this. Later on I know that they will fnd other thing more evidence. People might have something new to believe. | 3 |
9d21d81 | Everyone has their own opinions on everything. Some people would be for the driverless cars. Others may be against them. In my opinion I do not think we should have driverless cars.
To begin, at the end of paragraph 9 it says, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at faullt- the driver or the manufacturer?" I think that if we get into an accident then the government would blame us for not paying attention or something but it could have been the cars fault for not telling us to take over soon enough or we did not feel the vibration of the car so we back into something. Also, if the car were to malfunction and not tell us to take over or do any of the things that the author tells us that the car does. Then if you were to almost back into an object the seat would vibrate, the google car tells us when to take over, and there are a few other options. Because in this case I think that the risk of us getting in more accidents are higher that way than what they would be if we drove on our own. Also, if we got in an accident there would be costs such as medical bills, insurance, and if it was your fault or the cars fault that you crashed into somone else you would have to pay to get their car fixed too.
Furthormore, If we had to just sit back and wait until the car tells us to take over we might fall asleep. If that was the case then there would cause a ratio of accidents. Also, I feel like it would be hard for the driver to pay attention to the road because they would be distracted by everything else that they could not see before if they were focused on the road like they would be in a normal car.
Lastly, It would cost so much money to get rid of every car invented now and upgrade them to the driverless car. Because our taxes would probably go up so that the govenment could get the money to pay for all the parts needed. So I think we should just keep it the way it is because money is an issue for a lot of us.
Everyone should take this into deep thought and realize how much of a mistake this would be to invent a driverless car and look at all the cons of driverless cars. Some people will still be for it just so they could sit back and relax at the wheel. Others see that there are a lot of cautions to driverless cars. I think everyone should be on the same page and say no to driverless cars. | 4 |
9d25095 | There are many different emotions that people obtain each and every day. There have been many studies about different emotions of people and how the emotions are recongnized. The defintion of emotion is the way a person expresses themselves through body language. I believe that the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable becuase it will advance the teachers, the students will portray better attitudes, and it will benefit the school's decisions.
First, the teachers skills will advance with this technology. While teaching, the teacher will find out which material the kids are interested in. The text states,"Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication." Kids in school usually do not communicate how they feel to their teachers. This is one of the biggest problems with school. If there is an ability to change for the better, why not take it?
Next, during school, kids will portray stronger attitudes. There are two scenarios when speaking about how kids would act in school if this technology was available. The students would either give out a better attitude, or fake it until they make it. Students do not want their teacher to know how they are feeling. In the article, it states,"Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness- and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles." Therefore, the teacher has a strong idea of how a student feels. Unless, of course, the students are faking it.
Finally, this technology would benefit the schools decisions. The school would have the ability to study each student's emotions and find out how the student enjoys to learn. Better yet, the school will know which classes to place the student in based on his emotions toward different subjects, this is a very easy way to find out a pathway into a student's future. The article says,"She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent feaarful, and 2 percent angry." The quote is referring to the famous Mona Lisa artwork. However, if a school had access to all of that information about a student, they could make the student's career path excellent.
There are a ton of benefits to the innovation including advancing a teacher's skills, skyrocketing the happiness of students, and the overall decision making process that the school goes through. Many years ago, no one could ever imagine that this technology would come into existence. The techonology of this world is advancing and changing rapidly. No one has time to even blink. | 4 |
9d26da6 | Explorering venus comes with a high pay off but high risk. The authors claim is correct becuase it has enough information ot back up the idea. Venus's geographical and atmospheric condtions would not be ideal but it would provide anthor option for colonization in the future. The exploration of Venus is worth while scientific endver.
The Authors study on Venus provides enought facts and evidnece to condiser further evaluation of the planet. "Long ago, venus was probaly coverd in large oceans and could have supported varouis forms of life, just like earth today". The planet has a surface temperature of 800 degrees farien height. Also the planet has a much higher atmospheric pressure at over 90 times greater than Earth.
Venus is closer to our plant than we thought. Even thought its atmosphere contains clouds that are made out of higly corrosive acid. "The surface has a rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountians, and craters". The terrian is showen to be ruff but not unbarable for human colonization. Also Venus is one the closest planets to own own planetthan most others. The due to the ground condtions being hostile surveyers would need to be located 30 or more miles above the surface of the planet.
Exploring Venus would a beinificail and woth while scientific endver. Over the years Venus has been a topic of study due to its earth like qualites. The temperature of Venus is not as freindly to humans as our own atmosphereVenus is one the closest planets to own planet than most others. Lastly, the exploration of venus can be the next ground breaking scientific discovery yet. | 2 |
9d31789 | Yes I agree that Venus is dangerous place, but scientists are trying to find ways to dicover and learn more about Venus. Many years ago scientist believed that Venus use to have Oceans and Valleys.
Venus could be visted by explores but the tempature condtions is too hot for humans. Spacecraft have landed on Venus and they lasted a few hours every since then no one have been back since 3 decades. Also Venus has a very thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide. In paragraph 3 it says "90 times greater than what we experience of Earth" This qoute shows that Venus is a very hot plave to live on and that humans will never be able to live there. Venus have the hottest surface temperture of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our Sun. So this shows that Venus is a very hot planet that humans can not live on because of the conditions.
In Conclusion scientist, spacecraft and the NASA are still trying to see what they can do about traveling to Venus but no one has not beem back since then. This shows that Venus tempature and atmospehere is too bad to live in. | 2 |
9d3da12 | He's convincing people to be a seagoing by saying you can go to nice places. He said that one time he went to a place with streets of water. He also said it is an opportunity of a lifetime to be a seagoing. He is saying you should join the seagoings, becouse it is very nice to go to places all the way from the other side of the U.S.
He's also saying if you like taking care of animals then you should join. He talks about how his ant and him worked on a farm so that helped him out of taking care of animals, but then he says that it did not help him with the dangers of the sea. He also talks about how he gets he's ribs broken. He also says that you work for them you sometimes have to check on the animals hourly.
He tells you that his friend tolled him that he should work there, so he could not say no, because he knew it would be a life time opportunity. He tells you he would find his self having fun on borad, especially on the return trips after they droped off the anamals. He says he play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where the animals had been housed. They also played table-tennis touraments, fencing, boxing, reading. whittling, and games also helped pass the time.
He said being a seagoing was more then just an adventure. He said it open the world up for him. He said he was happy to help people by giving them animals and food. He said that he was prepared for the hard work. He also talks about how he all most falls in to the dark Atlantic. He says on he 2ed trip he was a night wachman wich means yous have to cheak on the animals every hour.
He tells you how long it toke to get to a few places. It toke about 2 weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States, and it toke about a mouth to get to China. Caring for the animals kept Luke busy over travling. That's how Luke is trying to convincing you to be a seagoing. | 2 |
9d3e9d5 | Dear, state senator I think changing elections by popular vote for the president of the United States would be better. Each candidate had his or her group of electors. Mostly the political party like Democratic and Republican. he Electoral college is the established Constitution as a compromise between electionof the presdident by vote in congress. Popular votes for the election of the president is more meaningful then having 538 electors and 270 electoral votes. I think the electoral college doesn't work.
In the electoral college system,voters just vote for the president, but along with that your voting for more electors in their political party. This is a very big deal for the people voting in elections. They have no control of whom their electors votr for. The electoral college is also unfair to the canidates because the winner-take-all system in each state. The best arguments in favor is the popular vote, but some canidates still lose from the presidency.
Looking at the breakdown of the number of electoral votes given to each state-California has the most votes. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. or instance, as Romney was in the South he had no campaign heavily in those states. He gained no electoral votes. In toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign-to really take notice inthe competing canidates. Those voters sre the ones to decide the election. Run-Off elections should be avoided, it would greatly complicate the presidential election process.
My advice to you;as the state senator is to not keep the Electoral College. The election of the populae vote would be more precised. It's maybe 1% unfair because in states like california they have like 55,000 republicans voting for 1 canidate. And if there's a tie in the electoral vote, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, where state delegations vote on the president. | 2 |
9d40e4e | Is living in venus important despite all the dangers? Well I think yes because just like mars you could maybe get life on venus If It was less toxic. I think scientsis are trying to make life on venus because it's possible.
My claim is that you could get life on venus because it's not to dangerous. On paragraph 2 he says "These dfifferences in speed mean that sometimes we're closer to mars and other times to venus". In paragraph 4 astronomers were saying "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life just like Earth". This evidence proves that if scientsis try, maybe we can get life on venus.
To conclude all of this I was basically trying to say that venus actually isn't that bad of an planet like saturn or mecury because it's either too hot or too cold in those planets. But in venus it's kind of right in the middle. So probably by 2025 there could be a chance of living in venus. | 2 |
9d44f80 | Driverless cars is a really bad idea. There are so many outcomes that could happen when the car is drving itself. It could malfunction and crash. The driver might not be paying attention and when they do have to take over, they don't and crash. And lastly there would be many people losing lots of money from sueings because people wouldnt know who was at fault, the driver or the manufacturer.
There are some positives to the driverless cars. For example people who just "have" to text can finally do that and when needed to drive can surely put there phone down for five minutesto help the car out. Also, less use of gas will help our world out with global warming, and the decrease of fossil fuels in the world. Finally, there would be a decrease in crashes across the nation, but many would not know who to blame.
Driverless cars should not be aloud for may differnet reasons. First, if the driver is tired and is not doing anything but watching the road waiting for it to say for them to take over, they could fall alseep and not see the warning sign. Second, It would have possiblely more drunk driving accindents, becuase they would think the car would just take them home insted of them having to worry about it.
Driverless cars are a bad thing and should not become a thing in the U.S. They wouldd lead to many dissagreements in court, people would take advantage of them. Lastly, people would dissrespect he car and what has been given to them from technology and think it is just a toy now! | 3 |
9d45eaf | One day while i was at my job working for NASA, I heard a door open. I turned to look, and in walked a conspiracy theorist, knuckles dragging the ground, dead eyes staring, and drool escaping from his open mouth. "May I help you, sir?"
"Yeah! I know there's a face on Mars and i want you scientists to stop hiding the evidence!"
Here we go again I thought. I had seen thousands of people like him, asking the exact same thing. and every time my reply was the same: There is no face on Mars. The appearance of the face is caused by shadows on a mesa.
However they never believe me. "Those pictures are faked so that you can hide the evidence!"
I always give them the standard reply that the pictures are official and that is that.
One thing I as a scientist don't understand about these people is why they think an alien civilization would build a giant replica of a HUMAN face. Theres no way they'd even know we existed, so why bother?
In conclusion conspiracy theorists are going to believe there is a face on Mars no matter how much evidence we give them to the contrary, so why even bother trying. | 2 |
9d48040 | Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers its present because its 97 persent of cardon dioxide blanks. The temperature of Venus is even worst them Earth. Why would a scientist need people to Venus to make us die from the air and the clouds. Being at Venus won't do anyting better for living there. Some reasons why people shouldn't stay in Venus is the air, the clouds, and planet's surface.
The reasons why Venus is so dangers is because of the air. the clouds, and the planet's surface. Venis thick atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blanket. The clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. The plant's surface temperature is average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The atmosphere pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Our sister plane is so inhospitable. I don't know why scientist are talking about further visites to the surface. They think that long away that Venus had everything like Earth but it might not true. Why is NASA going to send people to Venus to study it? It's a bad idea to do it because all they going to do it die.
Is Venus really a twin to Earth no its not. This is why Venus has so much danger because of the air, the clouds, and the planet's surface. NASA should just send robots to Venus instead of people. Making a person to go to risk their life is not fair. Robots are the better answer. | 2 |
9d48bc5 | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", Is about technology being able to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. And I am arguing that it is valuable. Because it is a better way for humans and computers to communicate better. The computer can tell if you are happy, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness for example your orbicularis oris around your mouth tightens your lips to show anger. It is also vauluable because it can show your real emotion in a picture too.
So if any student wanted to know how the author was feeling at the time and it could also help them with projects. It also know what ads you want to see like if you smile on a ad that you are watching it will bring up another similar ad. But if you are frowning it will bring up a diffrent ad. Another way it help is that the computer knows when a student is becoming bored or confused, then it could modify the lesson for the students. And it also has good animated faces and more expressive for the video game.
Which could help students in there career if they chose that profession.
It can even indicate a real or fake smile. And if you practice smiling and frowning it helps you create diffrent emotions like empathy feeling someone elses emotional state. But who woulve known a computer can do all of those things. | 2 |
9d4a923 | Cars have become apart of the everyday life of the average person. It's a mode of transportaion that everyone uses in every second of their life; though it is faster then walking itself, cars are not always helpful to us. Sources inidcate that, by limiting car usage it is possible to relieve stress and reduce pollution.
Limiting the use of cars can bring less stress to the everyday driver. When in a car, it is easy to see when the driver is stressed out. Stress accumulates with traffic jams or when someone is becoming infuriated by another driver, who is driving right in front of the other driver and going really slow. There are people who have seen there stress levels drop when they are not in or don't own a car. For instance, a community in Vauban, Germany, at least 70 percent of their residents don't own a car, while 57 percent sold their car to move there. A woman, Heidrun Walter, who is a resident there stated, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way"(Source 1). This verifies how people can get away from stress by just not having a car. In Bogota, Colombia, there is a day when automobiles are banned for a day, with the execption of buses and taxis. This day has become very popular, and is a "good opportunity to take away stress"(Source 3), as said by Carlos Arturo Plaza, a business man who rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife on that day. On this day millions Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work, leaving the streets free of any traffic jam, when a driver gets stressed out he most, as stated in source 3. This shows the number of people who participated in this event and also shows their, less stressful, alternative modes of transportation.
Along with relieving stress, pollution will become less of a problem. Cars are beneficial when it comes transportation, but they can cause harm to the environment as well. Pollution is a major problem in the today's world, and with the number of cars that are in use everyday it will only become worse. Smog or any other type of pollution can cause a city or even a country to take action. Such a Paris, Fance, who put a ban on driving to reduce pollution in their city, which rivaled Beijing, China, known as the one the most polluted cities in the world, as said in source 2. This strenghens the problems that cars pose on the world, these problems can lead to delivery companies losing money because the ban was put up and won't be lifted until the smog is gone. In addition, more information about car pollution can be found in source 1. There it talks about how cars are the "linchpin" of suburbs, and how they're "a huge impediment to current efforts to drasticallly reduce greenhouse gas emissions." In some places this is slowly resolving itself; places such as the United States have seen a drop in miles driven per person since it's peak in 2009. Sociologists believe that, "it will have beneficial implications carbon emissions and the environment"(Source 4). This indicates that, while it is a major issue it is not impossible to solve it.
Cars are an easy and fast form of transportation, but they can also cause harm to people and the environment. No matter how beneficial cars are to us, wouldn't it be better to limit the use of them? This way if cars usage is limited, then the less problems we face. | 5 |
9d4e141 | The Electoral College is a process which consists of selecting the President and Vice President. I'm indefensible about the situation because 60% of people would want to have a direct election unlike the one we have now. In the article is says that "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you would vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry". This means that if you vote for someone then 9/10 you're going to have to vote for more people then you expect. Some voters get all tangled up and confused and vote for the wrong candidate. This debate against the electoral college is a disaster because not everyone would have the same idea about it, there's going to be someone for both sides to argue for. Another quote from the article is "The electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance in winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states." The counterclaim of this article was to pick a side and tell whether the electoral college is a good thing or a bad thing. I was indefensible about the whole situation because it's unfair and irrational, and it pushes more and more people away from voting, I would agree to abolishing the electoral college. | 2 |
9d4e9b4 | "A cowboy who rode the waves" is a story where there is so much going on with so many people.
The main character in the story is "Luke Bomberger" he works two part-time jobs one at the Grocery Store and the other at the Bank. He has a friend named Don
Reist whom asked Luke to go to Europe with him. They would be riding on a cattle boat with 335 horses only. The reason they had to ride on a cattle boat was because World War 2 just ended and most people animals and buildings got destroyed. They were shipping animals over to Europe so that they could have their animals back. He just turned 18 before they left so he was old enough to help out. Since they had all of the horses he helped out with taking care of them they each had to be fed and watered two or three times a day. He was really good at taking care of all the horses because he used to help out on his aunt's farm with all of the animals. He had trouble sometimes when the storms would be super bad and it would make the boat rock with the bad waves. One time he was going to report back to the captin with the news on how the animals were doing because he was on nightwatch and he slipped and fell off of his ladder. When the boat started tilting he went slididng down the deck of the boat and amost went off board. He didn't go off board luckily because a metal bar stopped him from going two far but he did suffer from broken ribs and have to take some time off. On the trips back to go get more animals the people he was with would play games with him and they also got to see amazing sights on their way there and back sometimes even on the way there is they weren't too busy.
Most of the time this is what happens but his story is really interesting. Most people think it is a horrible idea to do this but I think it's a great one because you get to help people. It is nice to do something like that because most people are less fortunet and things that happened in Europe can happen to them and maybe even you when you don't ever expect it. | 2 |
9d52dd5 | Don't Believe Everything
Have you ever believed something that wasn't true? I have, but before you believe it you have to find out if it's true or not. In the article it says the "face" looks like it could have been a Martian mesa. Also the shadows and the lighting could be making it look more like a face. There for if the NASA wanted to go there to get evidence it would cost them a huge budget.
What if the "face" was a Martian mesa? It could be one. The NASA was watching it through the years and figured out it looked like it could be a Martian mesa or butte. It was also very common to see Martians around the Cydonia, just this one had unusual shadows that made it look different from the other ones. It could all just be a natural landform that looks like a face.
The shadows could be making the Martian look like a face. From the angle where they took the picture. The picture could have changed how the picture came out. The human mind can form shandows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth. Some people said it would be a good way to engage the people and attract attention to Mars. Some people can just be fooled by them and thinking it really is a face.
To get evidence from Mars to see if it is really a face would cost NASA a huge budget. Just to go to Mars is a lot, but to go there and get evidence from there and bring it to Earth is a lot. It also can effect the way back to Earth and be dangerous. They don't stop at Cydonia so they would have to plan it out and get all the supplies they would need to get there and get the evidence they need.
People will believe almost anything anyone says. You just got to have evidence to know if it's true or not. There are so many things to make the Martian look like a face. Like meteriods could of hit it and knock off a piece of it. They could of just got the wrong side, lighting, or shadows of it. So before you believe anything anyone says make sure it's true and not just something made up. | 3 |
9d5b06f | The author of this article is only focused on one thing in this article. They describe all of these reasons on why traveling to Venus is unsafe yet completely ignores his own reasoning by replacing it with an unrealistic claim stating that astronomers want to explore it. Also, while they explain the density is the same and how Venus is "Often reffered to as Earth's "twin"," they bypass the subject of how much will it cost, how it will affect the United States as a whole.
The author is failing to realise just how unsafe it is to actually go to Venus. They do go on to talk about the "electronis made of silicon carbide," but it doesnt change the fact that we could not survive eight hundred degree wheather and neither could a space ship. the space carrier would melt when it came into the orbit of Venus. Also if the atmosphere is 97% carbon dioxide is it really safe for anyone to go there. On Earth, we have a lot of pollution and a vast amount of carbon in the air but it is nowhere near the percentage in the article. Then you have a atmospheric pressure of ninety times more than our own. The article describes how that would crush a submarine that has been made to search the lowest points of the ocean. The article states in paragraph three, "Also noteable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to the sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probe seeking land on its surface."
The author is not taking into account the people who would need to go on this mission as well. We are talking about a human that if they were to get past the spot where they are orbiting that they will be faced with all of these horific obstacles. The lightning strikes would try to kill anyone who tries to find land on the surfac, yet they are trying to send people to find out about their curiosities? Are we okay with that? All of these factors will end up in a loss of a human if we try to step foot on Venus and that is not worth the curiosity of a few.
Attempting to go to Venus would be extremely costly and would be a very poor choice on our part in the long run. We are talking about putting a group of people and equipment that cost billions to trillions of dollars on a space exploration that has a vast possibility of not coming home. It would cost us a fortune and no onewould gain from it. Hypothetically, let's say the the craft landed, what are they going to have to face to get a rock and gas sample? The volcanoes, lightning strikes, and powerful earthquakes would kill everything and everyone on board before the can let out a sigh of relief. Venus may have been an Earth-like planet but as of right now, no one would benefit from an exploration there.
Venus can remain a mystery. The author writing this article is not thinking about the good for everyone and/or the possibility of it even becoming a reality. The whole article is flawed because even though we are alike in size and occasionally distance, no one has survived the landing for a reason. The planet is too dangerous for us to even think about trying to explore, so we will wait to see if factors change but for now the author wrote this article poorly. We are not ready at this point in time and we may never be but the curiosity of a few are not worth the risks. | 6 |
9d5d994 | No more cars. Cars are one of the many problems of the world. It's slowly but steadly kill us or the world. Thats why i say no more cars.
If we were to get rid of carsall over the world we would have such a better enviorment. Wouldnt you want a better enviorment for you and the younger generation to see. One of the main things that is polluting our cities is gas. More perpheribly diesal. There are over a thousand cars being driven in one city and all that gas that is used spreads to thye enviorment and causes deformation to our wild life. Many people dont realize that when diesal gas comes out of your exaust is a thick black smock that stays in that area for at least five minutes. Also when people get oil leaks they always say i'll get it checked tomorrow but never do and when they do get it checked the are leaking oil all over the street to get to the shop to get it fixed.
No more deaths would come of car accidents. Think about is every day you see something in the news about a car accident weather its car on car or someone being it by cars. cars cause alot of deaths in the world because people dont realize the amount of power they have and are always tring to impress. Hiting someone with your car expecially a child can scare a man for life because everyday when he gets in that car he is reminded of that day. Also think about all of the robberies. There wouldnt be much of that happening because they wouldnt be able to make a fast escame to get away with it. There is another thing solved by taking away cars, less criminals.
Less obese people would be living in the world because the wouldnt be able to get in their moterized vehicle to go to places. they would have to walk and even if there taking the train they are at least walking some where to get to that train. What if trains werent aloud either? You would definatly have less people over weight because they would be riding bikes or walking some where or if there late for something they wold run . Bogata has already made one hundred and eighteen miles of bicycle paths.
Birds cherping all over the city. Getting ride of cars would reduce the sound level and would allow wild life to come in to the cities. Wouldn't that be great, just wlking down the street minding your own buisness and you notice out of the corner of your eye a little doe, so elegant and piecefull as it walks down the street. I do know that not all animals are nice and friendly like bears and wolves but the occasional rare bird that flies past you on your way to work, wouldn't you rather see that than a cloud of black smoke come out of the exaust of the diesal truck infront of you. I know I would.
No more cars I say. No more. I want to see wildlife not smoke. I want to see a man that has lost one hundred pounds in the last year from riding his bike from place to place. Geting rid of cars is a great idea and some countries have already gotten the idea and I belive we should try it out. | 3 |
9d5eacc | Cars one of the world's basic means for transportation from places such as Chicago to Shanghai. Have you ever heard of a place where they bearly use cars. Due to that fact people in different areas dont even use cars such as the suburbs ranging from New York to Vauban. As a result of driving the famous greenhouse gases is coming from emissions from everyone's car not even knowing that you might be the cause of the greenhouse gases ranging from 12 percent in Europe and up to 50 percent in the United States in more car filled areas. Creating a natural disaster just by taking a drive to the store or taking a mid-night drive with your girl. All avoidable by just minimize the use of personal transportation.
Even though driving is not seen as a bad thing it has caused many complications in the past such as Paris's smog. Smog deadly to breathe was Paris's problem since everyone was driving a vehicle at the time. Due to the massive amount of people using cars smog became a daily routine producing 147 micrograms per week. As a result to this unforseen complication many decided to ban the use of cars until the smog was lifted or completely gone. Since people don't listen many still continued to drive their cars making about 4,000 people getting fined 22-euro which is about $31 in U.S money. Giving blame to diesel fuel since that is the main source of fuel in France many turned their heads to the emissions that diesel fuel has created mainly since 67 percent of the residents in France use compared to 53.3 in Western Europe, according to Reuters. Usually Paris has more smog than any other European capitals since the streets are filled with people driving. As many days gone by reducing the smog many were allowed to drive resigning the ban starting on Monday continuing on Tuesday.
How would you feel if you was not allowed to use your car for a full day? The people of Bogota feel it as an ordinary day just without vehicles. It had been the third straight year since cars had been banned with the execption of buses and taxies. It was used to promote alternative transportation and to reduce smog in the city. If violated the person would recieve an amount of 25 U.S dollars. Even though dark grey cloubs usually gave rain showers to the people of Bogota people remained casual and continued their natural lives. Parks gyms and things like it flourished with people so did new restaurants and upscale malls.
Will it be the end of the car culture? Will people stop using cars altogether? Is it possible that in the future we wont be using cars anymore for any reason? If so life without cars I think would be better just by reducing greenhouse gases and smog to a minimum. | 2 |
9d66f87 | This " face " on mars was a natural formation. There is no such thing as an " alien " and if there was, hwy would thye make a face on mars? Wouldn't they do something bigger? Exactly, so therefor this Unmasking the face on Mars, is antural. I mean jsut look at the way it is imprinted into Mars, there is physically no way an alien could do this. I think that believing that an alien could possibly do this, is just crazy.
The evidence i have are these pictures, i mean look at them. Also just listen to others opinons, some agree that aliens are no where near smart enough to do something like this. I think it is a nautral fromation because this is a scientific object here, it is a planet. So there for why would it not be? Many things happen on a daily basis. Also things age, possibly it is jsut aging and slowly starting to decae. This " face on Mars " thing is honestly just weird. I believe that maybe something somewhere happened in the past and thar is how the face got there so basically naturally, i just do not agree that aliens could have done naything close to this.
" Unmasking the afce on Mars", that is an opionated statement. It could be true, but it could be not true also. These pictures show not one bit of proof of laiens, so how could aliens do this? They could not have. These little air soace craft things go around and aorund and around for seconds, mintues, hours, days, years, so there is phsyically not a way for these aliens to become invisable and create a face on Mars. | 2 |
9d6f98e | Driverless cars, good or bad? many people are routing for the new technology in cars, but i feel as if this is dangerous. technology is good and all but are we taking it to far?
Technology now is literally apart of everyday life, when you wake up you probably turn on your tv and watch the news. Maybe you check your phone to see who texted or called while you were asleep. or better yet you might`ve woke up and already had coffee ready by your timer set coffee maker, this is all technology! from the time you wake up to the time you go to bed you are using technology. So if we already depend on it for everything else why cant we just drive our cars by ourselves?
Also, technology is not always dependable if you drop your phone in water it no longer works right? so what makes you think that if your driving and it begans to pour the rain that your technology controlled car will continue to work. water and electricity together is dangerous so if water is also somehow spilled in the car what does that mean for the driver.
lastly, the car is driven by itself you are just basically there just in case. But what if your on your way somewhere and suddenly need to go to the hospital in a rush. or maybe you need to stop at the gas station how will the car know? it may be an all the suddden thing and the car may not respond quick enough or stop fast enough then your just out of luck. the car sounds good if you want to just relax and not have to drive. until some road accident wasnt listed and you run right into it or the car didnt see the light turn red and you run it. technology isnt as smart as people make it out to be. it only does what it can.
This is why i feel like driverless cars are a bad idea, not only are you putting yourself in danger, your putting those around you in danger. i hope after reading this you will agree. | 3 |
9d733ea | Smart cars may sound smarter than a human being but how smart are they? Smart cars are suppose to be driverless and use less fuel. In my opionion smart cars should not be developed. A smart car can have a technical difficulty and cause an accident and the fault could be said to be the drivers when it never was. This can bring conflict with the driver and the company of the car which can lead to bad consiquences. The car should not be developed becuase it can have techincal difficulties, have a high cost, they take away the fun of driving and learning.
Smart cars should not be deveploed becuase it can fail on something and have techincal difficutlies. The car may not sense something around its surroundings and won't be able to alert the driver on time causing an accident. It can also have failing on the GPS and go a wrong way. The worst casesenerio would be the steering wheel locking and the driver would not be able to control the car if something was to happen. Smart cars may seem smart and safe but technology doesn't always work how it is suppose too.
Another reason why smart cars would not be a good developement would be the cost of the car. The car may be very high at price and wouldnt sell. It could also get a huge donation to get the car started but that money could be a waste by not having a successful project. The car could need something new and it could turn out to be very expensive and won't get fixed being left alone. The car may also need a special street to give it eletrical signal which would be expensive to remake new streets. Smart cars may just be a waste of money.
Another reason for not developing smart cars is we loose the fun in driving and learning. As a teen, people get excited because they get a new oppurtunity to learn and practice something new. We learn the basics of driving and learn from it. We get more freedom to do things and to go to places. But having a smart car can take that away. A teen won't learn from a mistake they do by not driving and correcting themselves. All a person would do is sit there and wait if anything happens. But a teen can have no knowledge in driving and won't know what to do. And as teens we can easily get distracted and cause an accident if we don't pay attention.
In conclusion, smart cars shouldn not be deveoloped. A smart car may sound smart and safe but when it comes to the real world technology can mess up and cause accidents. A human being should always have control of its own thibgs that being their life or their car. A smart car's technology can mess up, be very hight at price, and it can take away the fun of driving and learning. Smart cars should not control our driving, we ourselfs should. | 3 |
9d79792 | I think using technology to read students emotional expression in the classroom won't be a good idea because it will make many students feel uncomftorable,ruin the teacher lesson plans and takes away talking and communicating with other people.
Many students will feel uncomftorable having a computer in their face all day monitoring their emotions. It will become hard to stay focus in class. They will try changing their emotions and facial expressions on purporse just to get a reaction out of the computer and that can mess up a lot of things with the program and the teacher.
Teaching a lesson and knowing how the students are feeling about it is good but it has a few cons. It's great to tell whether their struggling or not paying attention but it can also be embarassing. If your teaching a lesson and a student is making a confused faced,the lesson is ruined and you have to help that student out and make them feel bad for having a confused expression.
Talking to friends and family or the people you love is how everyone in the world communicates. For example if someone is having a bad day they wouldn't want to talk for awhile and when they do it's with a friend. Or if someone just found out their relative just died they would want to speak to someone outside of class because they know their education is much more important,or someone can even be overly depressed trying to work in class and get the best grades possible.Since they have computers to know how their feeling it takes away the communication of speaking to another human being if their upset about something and don't want to show it.
In conclusion haing computers in a classroom to tell how students are feeling is not a good idea. It makes them uncomfotorable like a computer can just tell everyone how their feeling.It ruins teacher classes to know when a student is confused about their less. And it exposes their feelings their having in class about things going on at home. | 4 |
9d7bddd | Well this face isnt from aliens because if it was then it would have showen up out of the blew but it didnt because it took time to make. It took time for it to appear and not seconds. This amazing land form was a great thing to see but aliens did not create such beauty. Some people do not even think aliens are real but in my oppinion it was just a landform. It is a coinsadence that this land formed a human face but there is evidence that this is just a landfom.
In the artical it states that the eyes, nose and mouth are just rocks that make shadows. The sun was pointed at a certin angel to make it have this shadow type eyes, mouth and nose. The camera that they used for this picture was not in good quality, witched caused this to take a picture of this human like face because it wasnt pointed directly above this figure. Each pixle in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters dcompared to the 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. So the first photo that the people see was not a good picture of it at all.
In my oppinion i do not think that this was created by aliens. I think that this was just an amaizing thing that the landform on Mars can create this wounderful face of a human. Some people might think otherwise but there is profe from the text that shows that this is not something that the aliens have made. I mean it might look liks something that aliens could have made, but i dont think that they could have made something that magnifasent. We dont understand how the land form is on Mars. They could make craters that could make other things. Who knows what this land form could and will create. | 2 |
9d7fb51 | The author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars in the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming". In my opinion based on the reading there are more negative aspects to these cars than positive.
To begin with some positive aspects to driving these cars include, using half the the fuel of todays cars, driven more than half a million miles without a crash, and protect from danger. These driverless claim to use less gas than any other car which would make it more flexible. Without using gas these cars would most likely be using electricity which does lower the pollution levels, this is a positive change. But by using electricity it will likely increase payments in electricity which wont be good for people when paying their bills. These cars also claim to have driven millions of miles without a crash, the negative aspect to this would be that the cars still arent truly driverless. I admit wreckage free driving is a really good thing but even with a non driverless car it could still be free from crashes. You cant blame crashes on the car it is the driver, so the driverless car really isnt that different from a careful driver because either way there are still wreckless drivers that could crash into you.
As i pointed out in the last example, this car claims to protect from danger but they cant say that for everyone. The bad drivers out there could very possibly still hit you even if you are in a driverless car. These cars may be good for when you might hit a car while going in reverse as told in passage 5, "sensors can apply brakes", these sensors can stop you from hitting someone but that probably cant stop someone from hitting you. Finally, yes this car sounds like a luxury claiming to protect from wreckage and drive millions of miles without crashing, but in realitly it wont help you improve your driving skills, by buying this car you will depend mainly on this car but still have to drive it because it is not 100% driverless.
Next,with this car there are many negative aspects that will come with it including the expensiveness, not being truly driverless, and the legal issues. This car being driverless and all is a very expensive car to manufactur. The parts themselves are very expensive to collect, as told in paragraph 6, "radar was a deie on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars". This radar alone is 2 hundred million dollars, that is insane considering that there are a lot more parts going into the car. Another negative aspect to this car would be the fact that this car isnt even 100% driverless. In paragraph 7 it says "special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel" , I mean i dont see what the point is to buy this car if it needs you took pay attention to the road at all times and keep your hands on the wheel. If you were going to have to do this why not you put your foot on the pedals as wheel and just drive a car yourself and not pay the ridiculous prices that this car will consist of. In paragraph 7 it also says "human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires" , if the point of this car is to be driverless then why should a human have to be alert and take over? Finally the last negative aspect to this car is the legal issues that it will bring. In paragraph 9 it states that " in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars". The reason to this law is because states want to make sure that drivers, passagers, and pedestrians are safe, the law, makers believe that safety is best | 4 |
9d81d73 | Dear State Senator
Feburary 5 , 2015
I would want you to keep The Electoral College the same for its been up to Congress and popular votes from the citizens to elect the President and Vice President all this time. If we change The Electoral College , we might end up having to change a few more things. So far The Electoral College has kept this country great with its voting way for President and Vice President. Changing The Electoral College will break its original way of the Constitutional compromise between the election of President and Congress. The original way is what made this country the way it is today.
Sure people argued over The Electoral College in 2000 , but that was 15 years ago. If we change The Electoral College , we could be changing the coountry. It's better for the country that we don't change The Electoral College , plus it would save Cogress , senators , the President , and Vice President time and paper work. Write to you later senator ,
Sincerly ,
PROPER_NAME | 1 |
9d85ae6 | Dirverless cars can be good or bad, safe or reckless, and smart or dumb. Either way our technology is advancing and it may be adavncing too quickly. A good thing about the car is that its easier for disabled people and a bad thing is technology isnt always reliable. The cars could cause less accidents or cause even more. The cars could be the smartest thing the world could have or it could be the dumbest.
The thing about driverless cars is that we are not learning control and once again the world is getting even more lazy. Most of the time no one will be paying attention with them not having to drive. They will be too distracted listening to the radio, sleeping, talking on the phone, talking to passengers, or texting. Also if the person would need to take over they wouldnt be able too because they wouldnt know when to take over, because of the distraction.
16 year olds wont be able to drive normally, because they will never learn because of the driverless cars. The teenagers would just sit in the car just like a passenger and not drive. The teens would be so distracted with all their social media and texting they would have time to react if something went wrong. If the teenager needed to take over they would know what to do because they didnt learn how to drive right.
Although this is a rather good thing for disabled people. If they have an amputated leg or leg and actually any disability that would still allow them to drive it would be easiar on them, because they may not be able to drive 100 percent of the time. They would be less stressed out on people yelling at them for being too slow and fighing and conflicting with them.
Disabled people already can drive, you can get a prostedic leg and still be able to drive. If they cant drive 100 percent of the time they should be driving anyway. That is a huge hazard on the road. It could lead to many accidents and multiple injuries or even death.
Driverless cars will come whether we like them or not. I personally do not want the driverless cars, but I would have to deal with it and embrace it. I still think there needs to be a long time inbetween now and when they do come out so it gives our people and technology time to embrace it and get used to the Driverless Cars. | 4 |
9d90fe3 | I believe that the electoral college is an outdated system of voting, and that we should get rid of it. If we removed the electoral college, votes could be counted much quicker, and more accurately. Our system now is outdated, and needs to be replaced with something different.
The electoral college was established in a time where technology was very primitive, and votes had to be taken as a general consensus, because counting hundreds of thousands of votes would take a large amount of time and was impractical. In current time though, counting single votes is much faster and accurate than going through the process of the electoral college. A large poll could be taken that digitally stores the votes of citizens quickly and safely. The electoral college is not very accurate either. For example, as stated in source 2, Al Gore won the popular vote, but loss due to the way that the electoral college works. Many citizens feel as if their vote doesn't matter, because they aren't directly voting for a candidate, they're voting for electors that will vote for a candidate.
The thought that in a democracy, that the voting system that we use to pick our "leader" is a winner-take-all ideology is absurd. If we are to keep the electoral college, we must change the way that the electoral vote system works. We must change it so that it is no longer winner-take-all, and make it so that a certain percentage of votes goes the party that the vote is for. For example, if 50% of people voted for Romney, and 50% voted for Obama, we should split the electoral votes right down the middle, so that the amount of electoral votes a candidate gets reflects their popular vote. Many presidents focus on larger states, which is understandable due to the fact that they have more votes, but if we change the way that the votes work, the candidate that focuses on many smaller states can stand a chance in the election.
So as you can see, if we want our future presidents to be elected fairly, our voting system must change. Whether it is completely taking away the electoral college, or just changing the way that electoral votes are counted, there must be a change. I don't think that you want to see the candidate that you voted for to lose as Al Gore did back in 2000. | 5 |
9da2c13 | These sources focus on the advantages of limiting car usage. The usage of cars has been decreasing as the years go by, not only in the United States, but in other countries as well. The residents of certain countries are beginning to use walking or taking a train or a city bus as a means of transportation instead of using their cars, that is if they own one.
The advantages of limiting car usage are endless. One advantage is that it relieves a big amount of stress on people. According to source one, having a car is a big responsibility, sometimes one that certain people are not able to handle. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two. Not having a car or avoiding having to use a car is becoming easier for people. For people that live in suburban areas, public transportation is going to have a higher demand. This is because there is an attempt to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation, with less space for parking. In this new approach, stores are going to be placed a walk away, or on a main street, rather than having them all together in malls along a distant highway. Not only will it make it easier for people to access stores or other necessities, but the money that the public transportation will receive will go to the city, giving them more to use on important things the community needs. Furthermore, it is evident that limiting car usage relieves a big amount of stress on people.
Another advantage of limiting car usage is that it brings people and countries together for a cause. Limiting the use of cars is spreading worldwide and there are many people that agree with this concept. According to the third source, in Bogota, Colombia, a program has been started that is set to lower the rate of care usage and increase the usage of public transprortation. Millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work during a car-free day, leaving the streets of this capital city empty and unoccupied. The interactions between the community are inevitable with so much people walking and being all in one place at one time. Furthermore, the act of a car-free day is also spreading to other countries. Municipal authorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event and were extremely enthusiastic. "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders," said Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asunción, Paraguay. With this act spreading and moving across borders into other countries, the use of cars will soon begin to decrease even more than it already has. This will help to lower the pollution as well as other economic problems caused by cars.
These sources focus on the advantages of limiting car usage. The usage of cars has been decreasing as the years go by, not only in the United States, but in other countries as well. The residents of certain countries are beginning to use walking or taking a train or a city bus as a means of transportation instead of using their cars, that is if they own one. With the information provided, how can one refuse to join the movement to limit car usage? | 4 |
9da6a6d | "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," is an article written by someone who is arguing that Venus is a worthy exploration, despite the fact that it is highly dangerous. The author's claim was strong, and the points were valid. They included many different supported statements, and facts, and arguments that support their case very well.
Throughout the article, the author gives many different statements that help support their statement that Venus is worth the risk. In paragraph 2, the author discusses all the qualities and characteristics that make Venus an ideal planet to study. Venus is most similar to Earth by means of size and density, and at times, the closest in distance. In paragraph 4, further evidence is put forth. Paragraph 4 discusses the interest scientists have in exploring Venus. It states, " Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." Scientists believe Venus might have once been covered in oceans, which could have easily supported some sort of life. The author included that evidence to show readers that Venus might hold questions many scientists want answers to. The author wants the reader to think more into the exploration of Venus and all of the positive outcomes it could bring us.
The author supported their statements and claims adequatley. For each point the author made, they they gave factual evidence that backed up their point. Each statement was legitamate. For instance, one of the author's points was made in paragraph 5. The author uses an idea from NASA to back up their claim. It states, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." NASA is working on ways to put explorers on Venus, and the author uses that to help further his claim that Venus should be explored, dangerous or not. The author gives so many points and outside evidence that their claim is more than supported. | 4 |
9dab0d6 | There is different opions about technology used in class, some people may be agree and some people may be disagree. Sometime we dont understand how easy can be life if we lmprove our technology, in this case there is a program that reads emotional expressions, if we allow this technology into classrooms it can help use to figure out many problems, for example, when someone is sad, or it's really worry about something,or even when we distracted. Most of the times we stay quietbecause we scare of what other people will say, but sometimes it would be good to let others know so they can help us and prevent from bad things to occur.
It would be good to use this type of techonlogy in a classrrom because the teacher will notice when his class is gettting bored and is learning less, so the teacher can improve something to do better and make his student to pay attention and learn more. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Most of the times when a student is bored in class is because he does not like his class, and whyhe does not like his class? probably he dont understand well, and the student needs help, so if the teacher would have this technology they will know what is happening, and they can try to fix this problem, either making his class more interesting,explain more, staying more time, or working after school. The point of of this is to make students to focus and be able to learn well. After the students learn they will doing better in school, better grades, and later on they can have better future.
This new technology can help us in many ways because it can helps us to know if there is something wrong happening that maybe it needs to be changed, if we choose to use it we would increase our opportunies to do good. kids would have better education, and the better our education is the better our nation will be. | 3 |
9dadb53 | The face on mars is a natural landform, I know this because in the most recent picture there are many cracks in the formation. More reasons I know this is because aliens do not exist. The last reason of how I know Mars is not made by any type of alien is how would they know what humans look like. Most of NASA's people believe that it wasnt made, but is a natural landform. NASA was confident that it was a formation as well after posting it on their website they captioned " A huge rock formation" this shows that the majority of NASA believe this as well. I know no aliens know what we look like because we never seen any aliens orbiting or trying to take a photo. The way that I know aliens dont exist is because there are none that we've seen after years and years of study. In conclusion, I know that this wasnt made by any living thing and that it is a natural landform because aliens dont exist, they dont know what we look like, and NASA, who works on things like these every single day think it is a natural landform. | 2 |
9db2ecb | Safety is a big important issue while driving. Although manual cars are coming to end, driveless cars are being improved and much more technical than our cars now. So how driveless will the cars become in the futrue. Todays' technology has improved ten times better than the late 1900's. Having maps to GPSs, flip phones to smartphones, and also sercurity in cars, phones, and homes. There's also disadvantages of improved sources of technology. Having people break into sercured things.
Driving laws focus on keeping drivers ands pedestrians safe and knowing when to alert driver to take over. Cars need to reliably safe in order to buy this car. Any fails or accidents, who's fault is it. Safety is a big concern.
Instead of having cars that will drive itself, why not have sensors when someone is texting while driving and automatically turn off their phone.
Automakers are still continuing their work to prevent problems in the feature. | 2 |
9db3108 | According to the text the challenge of exploring Venus is really worthy for NASA to explore or to know more about because all people know about venus is that Venus is really hot, nobody can go to venus.
The challenge of exploring venus is a pretty big challenge. Copious factors contribute Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for human to explore. Venus is the closest planet to earth why not find a way to explore it, Human have sent a copious of spacecraft in Venus but none of them survive the landing for more than a couple hours. Which is why we should find a way to get to Venus.
Venus as a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide makes it more challenging. Venus has a temperature of 800 degrees which is really high it's 90 times greater than our planet which make Venus really hot and challenging to explore. Venus condition is far more extreme than any human coud have imagine. If Venus is so inhospitable why is are scientist discussing on further visit to Venus? Maybe it's because it could be the only planet that is like earth, no one knows, which is why we have to know more about Venus no matter what it takes.
NASA has one idea for sending human to study Venus their idea is to fly over 30 or so miles above Venus, which sound like good idea because our pilots do it almost everyday to survive a storm while their flying a plane. More importantly, researchers cannot take a samples of rock or gas or anything else from a distance. Therefore they are trying to find a way to land on venus and take a good look so that they can know a little more about Venus our sister planet. Many of our researchers are working on a big project that would allow are machines last longer on Venus because Venus it's really hot.
The Challenge of exploring Venus is a big challenge, i think we will find a way to get to venus because if we got a lot of thing we got to know about our sister planet. | 4 |
9db3db7 | Reasons to Join the Seagoing Cowboys Program!
One reason to join the Seagoing Cowboys program is because, you get to help people. Helping people is a good deed so why not. The Seagoing program has many people help others. Luke says," There where 44 nations that came to help care for people that needed animals, food, and shelter."
You should also join the program because you can visit unique places. Luke said that he got to see the Acropolis in Greese which was special. Luke said, " I got to go to Europe, China, and Greese." I think that it would be fun to go to those places. It would also be like a vacation but not.
Another reason to join the Seagoing program is because you won't be alone. Luke said, " There where 44 nations helping in the Seagoing Cowboy program."
I personally think that you can make a great impact on others.
One more reason why I would join the program is because I like helping others. I aslo think it would be fun to go to different places. My final reason is because I have always wanted to be in the army and save people or places from destruction. | 3 |
9db4251 | Driverless Cars are the furture of the automoblie. No crashes have happened to googles smart cars so far. They take up less gas, saying "The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis." Those are just two of many reasons why driveless cars are going to change America.
The small amount that driverless cars have actully driven there hasn't been one issue with crashing into other objects. Yes there are still bugs that still need to be fixed. The cars can not at this time pull out or pull in a driveway, they also can not tell when road work is happening or when there has been a crash on the road. All things when they first start are a little bit buggy but that doesn't mean in two to five years that things could get fixed. When those bugs do get fix we could see a crashless world.
In the artical they are talking about a driverless taxi's sevice, that is more cost friendly and more flexable than the buses. Gas isn't high cost like it use to be but when you're driving people from one part of town to another side, the gas bill started to stack up. Driverless cars always take the shortest route and are just more gas friendly then your average taxi. Cutting that gas bill in half will safe more money to put back into your company or the communtiy. Gas had always been in high demand the driverless car could stop that.
The only thing keeping us from those driveless car in the laws and the bugs that they do have but again in two to five years both of those could have change the way we see cars forever. The prices of gas will fall, there will be less driving issues. The world has we know it will be safer and less popluted with less Co2 coming from every oned cars. | 3 |
9dc468e | The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger because of the knowledge we will gain, because in the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author states "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-Like planet in our solar system". The author is trying to explain that, though Venus is not a very suitable place for humans to be, we should still explore Venus, beacuse of the scientific knowledge we will gain.
Another reason the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger is because of the thing the scientist could tell people back on earth about Venus. In the article the author states " Venus was covered with oceans and could have supported various form of life just like Earth" The author is trying to explain to the readers that if they were to accomplish their goal of visiting and studying Venus, they could come back to earth and tell the people how similar Venus was to Earth.
The last reason the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy despite all of the dangers is because Venus has some features that are analogous to those on earth, because in the article the author states "Venus has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains and craters". The author is trying to explain that if scientist were to got to venus and discover something it may be of great help to the science world | 2 |
9dc6cd2 | Humans are capable of making many expressions with the muscles located in the face,and some of these slight changes might not be observable to the normal human eye without intense concentration from a person that is knowledgeable in the anatomy of the face and what the different changes mean.The facial coding system(FACS) is an attempt to take those slight changes that often go unnoticed and shed light upon them so that you can get an accurate idea of how a person is feeling.
teen suicide rates have been going up as the rise of social medias and the internet has increased,but with
the facial action coding system we could try to combat this trend by implementing it in ways that could benefit these suicidal teens.Many teens come to school upset or get upset during the school day but don't like to go to their counselors for help.Some of the main reasons why students don't like to go to their counselors are things such as: fear of their parents getting involved, fear of other students picking on them or judging them because they need to see a guidance counselor,and a belief that an adult couldn't possibly know what they are going through because adults didn't grow up in an age where most people use social media which tends to set standards that few can actually achieve.The Facial Action Coding System would allow counselors to be notified of students that are feeling upset so that they can try and help these students in need.Have you ever felt like your life wasn't worth anything because their were so many people that were better than you? Well this is a mentality that many high school students have so instead of getting help they just allow themselves to stay unhappy because the don't want to inconvenience someone who is actually worth something.
There has been a massive spike in student's shooting up school's and in most cases it is because the student felt that the school,or its students just watched as they suffered from sadness or other issues, but usually it is just that no one realized what they were going through.Teenagers have become good at hiding their true emotions from others because they try to live up to some stereotypical standard such as the stereotype that real men do not cry, or the stereotype that women only want tough guys so if you want a women then you need to be a jerk that seems to not care about her.Many women also suffer from these standards that they believe they need to live up to such as the false belief that all women should be thin,or the belief that they need to wear makeup to cover their face because if they don't then guys won't be attracted to them.The Facial Action Coding System would allow the counselors to be aware of when these pressures were sapping a student of their happiness,and try to help lift the weight presented by these pressures off of the student's back.If we can help these students that feel this way than we would have happier students which would decrease the violent trend of school shooting that is on the rise.
School is like a sport in that in the end everyone is working towards the same goal of keeping society going and flourishing, so by keeping the students happier you are benefitting society as a whole.Humans have a tendency to link happiness with productivity so in theory happier students lead to more productive students,and more productive students become more involved members in society.
depression is linked to many health issues such as paranoia which hinder people by making it hard for them to function in normal society.depression related health issues can also lead to drug abuse because students try to find a way to make themselves happy and there is a stigma that drugs will make you feel good so they try to use the substances as an escape from their life.drugs cause many students to put more effort into getting the next dose of the drug than they do on being sucessful in life.
If you have ever been to school than you would most likely notice that many students find school boring and unecessary,this method of thinking could be directed to a more positive one if school could be more tailored towards what the student thinks will be important or what they find interesting.The facial action coding system could help make this a reality for students as it could be used
to detect when a student is feeling bored or annoyed at the presented work and notify a teacher. This would allow the teacher to try and help the frustrated student, because many times students may not understand something but don't want to ask about it for fear that they may get ridiculed by the teacher or other students.
Many students could benefit from the Facial Action Coding System by
allowing staff memebers to help them when they need it but are to scared to get help.This software would increase safety for students as well as allow them a greater chance to learn.this is why I believe they should have the Facial Action Coding System in school's. | 5 |
9dcac24 | Driverless cars would be good because there are people who are lazy and dont feel like driving in the mornings can just get into there smart cars and tell the tech to drive them to work. They would help get to the destination faster, the cars are independent they will help with other purposes such as if ur in danger the seat will vibrate. It will also alert the driver to take over when pullin in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents. We would have smarter roads less car accidents, when the people dont pay attention the car can alert them of a incoming car from the other side of the road or highway.
But on the other hand the Manufacturers can accidently miss something in the car to make it malfunction and stop working when driving and could cause accidents or purposly drive into a oncoming car or truck. The law would have trouble with imature people who just want to drive faster and have the advantage because they are in a smart car. They could just blame it on the driverless car, and sometimes it would be the cars fault even tho the human is driving it.
Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems will be solved ahead of time. They have projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on auto pilot 90 percent of the time. Sooner Mercedes Benz,Audi, and Nissan are planning to have the cars manufactered to drive themselves by 2020/ the road truly autonomous car's. | 2 |
9dcd73c | The landform on Mars that looks like a face may seem like a momument created by aliens to some people, but it is actually just a mesa, which was uncovered by NASA's cameras on a cloudy day. An ancient alien civilization seems more than possible to some, but while it is a possibility, the landform on Mars is not an ancient civilization. Evidence of this is found on the image directly before the article, which shows the landform over time. More recent cameras have a better quality of capturing photos than previous ones, which is why NASA photographed the landform at different years. The landform on Mars is just a mesa, because it resembles natural rock formations on Earth and there is photo proof of it.
The face on Mars is just a mesa, because according to the article, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a buttle or mesa -- landforms common around the American West." The article later states that the Martian landform resembles Middle Butte in the Snake River of Idaho, which is a lava dome. The Martian landform is clearly a natural mesa, not an ancient civilization created by aliens, since it resembles occurances that are common in Earth's natural structure.
The Martian landform is a natural occuring rock formation, since there is photo proof of it and it looks identical to mesas, buttles, and lava domes on Earth. An ancient alien civilization may seem possible to some, and impossible to others, but the face on Mars is just a rock structure that is natural to the Martian landscape. All in all, the "alien civilization" is not an alien civilization after all, and is instead, a Martian mesa. | 3 |
9dd3136 | There are many different emotions that you go through on a daily basis. Some of them are pleasing motions and others aren't. Every emotion that you go through can be seen by other people through your facial queues. Facial queues are important in some instances, but they are not important for education.
The Facial Action Coding System would have a lot of uses on a set for a tv program or play. It could help make a set run more efficiently by automating ligh queues and what not. The opposite of that is true for schools. There is not a real good reason for schools to use funding to buy FACS because not every computer in the school needs one. It might be useful to have one on every external door to the school to aid with security but not on school computers. In paragraph 5 of the excerpt it states, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day." That sentence is explaining that humans already do what the FACS does, Furthermore we don't need a computer to read our emotions because we already do so.
Facial queues are important to everyday life. It is how humans read and help understand eachother. A FACS can be useful to help further security in schools, but not as useful to help students learn. | 2 |
9dd4052 | I just finished reading the Challenge of Exploring Venus. The Challenge of Exploring Venus explain what is Venus, why is call the "Evening Star", and many more. I'll explain how well the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers.
I'll explain the Earth "twin". A thick atmosphere. of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus.
I'm also going to explain the NASA the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
The Earth "twin".
Venus is the closest planet to Earth in the same density and size, and the closest in distance. Venus and Mars those two are orbit the sun at different speeds.
Which mean that sometime we are closer to Mars and Venus.
Everytime human has a mission to touch the Venus it doesn't work. they sent numerous spacecraft to the land each mission was unmanned. The spacecraft has only survived the landing for more than a few hour.
A thick atmosphere of almost 97 persent carbon dioxide blankets Venus.
The most challenging about the Venus is that the clouds oh highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere.
Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet, even though Mercury is closer to our sun Venus is still the hottes surface. And high pressure, heat, erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes , and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land oon its surface.
The NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The NASA is the idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA is the solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus. That would allow secientisits to float above the fray. If Blimp hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscarpa.
just like our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude. While hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly
ground condition byb staying up and out of their way. It not an easy condition , but survivable for humans.
I agree that the author think that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger. Why, because i think that studying Venus would be fun and probably will help you learn something about our solar system. And it really challenging . | 2 |
9ddca63 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents some positive and negative aspects of driverless cars, but that idea of bring cars onto the roads should be allowed and not against the law.
According to the text, driverless cars from google are being imporved and developing so that they can reach the goal of one day no one buying cars because people wont need it. Sergey Brin envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system.
One of the benifits of having driverless cars one day in the future would be going to places far without getting lost. People sometimes when they are in a hurry or trying to find their destination to where they are going is getting lost. Not every one in this world knows where every place is at and how to get to them, but GPS receivers within the car can help them get there and staying on track without getting lost.
On the other hand, some if not many people would think that driverless cars should not be put on the roads due to the fact that they can maufunction at anytime and at any place. First, most people probably wound't want to still drive if in any case being told to drive due to cautions on the roads. Second, in most states its illegal even to test and drive computer-driven cars. But also in some states they do allow but limited use of semi-autonomour cars. However, people would be happy even if they didnt like the idea of driverless cars on the roads because they could enjoy their rides where ever they are going to.
One day in the future there will be cars that will be driving themselves after the passenger puts in all the correct details about where he or she is going to. The author wants to see a day when there will be driverless cars on the roads, which could happen at anytime when they get improved. | 3 |
9dde278 | I believe that the computer reading facial experssions in the classoom for students is valuable because if they see the student get bored or not intrested they can tell what to show in there intrest so they can teach the students. It will be more helpful for the teachers to keep the students on task while on the computer. The teachers wont have to worry about the students not learning anything cause they are not intrested. Being able to read face expressions is a good idea and it helps alot on knowing weather the students are intrested or not. Some students won't tell you they dont like the way you are teaching them and they just get off task and not pay attention whats so ever.
There are alot of times that students get bored on how the teacher is teaching the extructions and just get distracted and not learn a thing. Having a computer help them with that will be awesome for both teachers and students. They will both get something out it by one learning and paying more attention and the teacher doings its job on helping them understand. Most students will enjoy the fact they can learn off something that intrests them the most. There won't be alot of class distraction.
We will have more students passings classes. Have more students on task. Teachers wont have to be complaining so much on how students are paying attention. Also on how they are distracting the class cause they are beyound bored. That is my opinion on why getting facial experssion is valuable! | 3 |
9ddf1bf | I say that we keep the electoral college because it was the way that the founding fathers found out how to balance out how the peope should decide. But they were only allowed to vote if they had certain papers to allopw saying they are citizens. The way that it works is that each person running has a group of electors and is counted by the congress to find out who is winning in the campain. It consiswts of 538 electors ,majority of 270 of the electoral votes are required to elect the president your state entittled allotment of elctors to help in the campain. They get one in the house of represntivies and two senators.
I think that keeping the electoral college is what we need nothing is wrong with the system since our fore fathers were around so why change it now. It says that each canidate has the option to pick his/her electors to be in for the election. Then on every fourth year after the first monday in november on tuesday the president is elected. But before they get there they go to each state saying there speeches and hopin that the majority of that state votes for them because most states use a "winner takes all" were if you get the majority you get the whole states vote.
But if thats not enough then maybe this is why we should keep the electoral college. Even if Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole,and the U.S chamberer of comerce say its wrong and Al Gore. But i think it should stay because it was the best and easiest way to figure out who should be elected for president/vice president. Because even with speculations that its unfair they have no liable proof that it is.
But these speculaters dont understand that they are choosing the president and the electors before the vote of the president. They only see it happen one time since 1888 and everything goes crazy becuase gore was more popular and bush had more electoral votes and bush won even if gore was more popular. In 2012 when obama was elected over romney with a 61.7 to 51.3 because that almost all the states were using the electoral college all or nothing. In order for that one canidate to be elected the person needs to have a trans-regional vote for say romney only had the south thosw are not enough votes to win over the north and south. The canidates are mostley going for the "swing states" because they listen to the whole campain and decide who they think deserves it through there campain. Larger staes get way more attention becasue they are worth more points to the election. They try to avoid run off elections because they are shot out of the water that way with casts as low as the mid 40's in percentage.
Thats why i think the elctoral college deseres to stay. Not because al gore got mad cause he was favorite and still lost but over all i think that just because thats omething bad happend one time does not mean that the whole thing has to go down in flames. Like i said we need to keep it we have had it since the 1800's and there is literally nothing whrong with it so those are my reasons on why the ellctoral college should stay. | 3 |
9de090c | Are driverless cars a good idea? Are these cars a postive invention for our world today? Driverless cars can help our lives in so many aspects and make our world better. The development of these cars will bring more safety to drivers, prevent accidents, and also use less fuel.
Driverless cars will make driving safer for the driver. The cars will help the driver to avoid texting while driving. The manufacturers will lessen the texting while driving issues by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays, helping the driver pay more attention to the road and things happening around them. The driver will be more aware of what is happening on the roads, rather than paying attention to cell phones.
The development of these cars will also prevent accidents. Google's Toyota Prius, for example, uses a spinning sensor on the roof. The sensor uses laser beams to make a constantly updating 3-D model of everything around the car. This can help the driver be aware of things surrounding their automobile, such as other cars, animals, or pedestrians. With the help of this sensor, drivers will see more things surrounding them, preventing accidents. Google's cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash.
Lastly the driverless cars will consume less fuel. This will reduce prices for drivers and make a more eco-friendly enviornment. The world is often trying to come up with solutions to use less fuels. The development of this vehicle would take a step in helping the eco-friendliness of our world.
Using driverless cars will be a postive improvement to our world. The cars will make the roads more safe for drivers, help prevent accidents, and conserve fuel. In conclusion, the development of driverless cars are a great advancement to our world and help our day-to-day lives. | 4 |
9de4b03 | Say No to Driverless Cars
More than 50% of the population in the United States say yes to driverless cars. They want the future to come for them, without even thinking about the effects these cars can leave for them in the future. Driverless cars are a "cool" concept that movies introduced to us many years ago, leaving people wandering if it could really happen one day. Now that there is a possiblity that these cars could actually happen, these people are going crazy and supporting this idea. Supporting the development of driverless cars should not happen because of the dangers that can some with them if they were to malfunction, leaving a bigger disaster for us than what we started with.
In the article, it states that driverless cars now, can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves but they are designed to notify the driver when it requires human assistance. All cars need human assistance instead of a computer telling it what to do, otherwise it will not be as safe. A person always needs to have eyes on the road, especially if a computer is the one driving because there are possibilities that something could go wrong. Computers do not compare to the human brain, for example there are instances where a person needs to decide what is best to be safe in the road. A computer will not be able to do that because they are programmed and do not have a sense of feeling or emotions.
If there are laws that make even testing computer-driven cars illegal, that states that maybe the whole development of these cars is not a good idea. Laws are there for a reason, and that is to keep the drivers, passangers, and pedestrians safe. Even though there are a few states like California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia, that approve the use of semi-autonomous cars, it is only a matter of time before a disaster happens. With computer driven cars, there is no garantee that the people will be safe. Because there is no safe way to know if driverless cars are a good and safe idea, it is better if they are just not produced at all.
The number of technological parts that is used in the Toyota Prius is astonishing! It uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor. All of these sensors and parts must be extremely expensive to make and include in the car. Billions and billions of dollars would go into making this possiblitly real. That is not even including the specially designed roads that are going to be needed in order for the driverless cars to even work. The amount of money needed in order to produce these cars is extremely high, and if it will cost a lot to make, the amount of money needed to buy these cars will surely be the same.
Safety should be every drivers first priority. These cars will not provide much safety for anyone on the road. Driverless cars are not even important or necessary, because us humans can drive just fine and not worry about being safe. Peope are just becoming lazier as years go buy and if this continues, before we know it we will be in a bigger problem than what we began with. Driverless cars sound amazingly cool and futuristic, but they are just not safe and should not be developed because of the endless possiblites that could go wrong. | 5 |
9de5f10 | I believe that driverless cars are actully a bad idea. While driverless cars can help us with stuff they can also hurt us. While the car is driving without the help of humans it wont know what to do when it hits construction sites and when imdeiatite actions needs to be taken. With the human instincts not there behind the wheel the car will be more open to cullisions and massive wrecks. Driverless cars may be what people think we need but they could also mean many more accident related deaths.
Driverless cars they do alot to help us. Driverless cars can apply brakes, steer, and can even drive themselves now but is that really something you want in a car. While they can drive themselves they can't take the same action as an alert person behind the wheel. Lets take this for instance your driving down a neighbor hood street and a kid runs in the road an alert human can hit the breaks and swerve but a car wont be able to do it all that fast. The driverless cars dont have that quick instict we humans do where we can jump right into action at the sight of danger. The humans are also capable of driving slowly and safely through consrtuction zone where a car will just go the speed limit it is registered at. So driverless cars can't dp the jobs we humans can behind the wheel when driving.
With out the humans insticts the cars will be more open to wrecks as well. while even with our insticts us humans cant avoide all car crashes that happen in our life time. So if we cant do it what makes you think a car that don't have those instincts can do it either. A crash can happen in a blink of an eye and we cant always be ready. Th best we can do is hope we can apply brakes or avoide bthe cullision by going around the side. Thats the problem though going around and avoding it is not always an option. When thats the an option you have to apply th brakes quickly to reduce speed. That will take atleast a little impact away from the crash. Now cars have a breaking system in them where they apply breaks when they are close to something. If you are going down the interstate at 65mph and need to stop good luck having the car do it. By thr time you reach the cars range to apply brakes it will be to late.
Driverless cars may be what people think we need but they are not what we need. We need people to start focusing more of driving and stop being distracted. While driverless cars are becoming popular the more wrecks are increasing.along with this new technoligy is being built into cars like phones so people can call each other. This is just distracting drivers more and can lead to bigger wrecks in the future. We need to stop with the smart cars and go back to no phones and cars where humans have to drive themselves. This driverless cars are a step in the wrong direction.
So thats my view of driverless cars. I dont like them i thin they are a terrible idea and should stop being made. I dont want to see anyone else getting hurt because they were unfocused while driving. These cars will be the death of many more people then any nother kind of driving. Driverless cars cant do what humans can and they will one day be worse then drunk driving. Thats my perspective on driverless cars i dont think they should be used at all. | 4 |
9dea2ae | My positions on driverless cars is that they shouldn't exist. Those in the next gereration wouldn't know what it would feel like to drive your very first car let sit on the driver's side. Don't get me wrong I understand that it was possible for google to create a car that drove itself for half a million miles without crashing, but you have to understand that freak accidents happen in the world that we can't prevent.
What would happen if an elderly woman is on the highway in a driverless car and the car starts to malfunction and spins off the road. She may know how to drive but her reaction isn't quick enough to stop the car. Freak accidents happen everyday. Technology is so advanced nowadays that I feel like it is to much power in some of our hands. People get carried away and start building things much more powerful than themselves and become power hungry. We have seen it on so many different occasions that we are oblivious to it.
We have drones coming in hospitals now perfoming surgeries for surgenons who are unavailable at the moment not only is that to advanced it is also putiing people out of a job. What would happen to the cab drivers all around the world. What would they do, they would have to start all the way over with a new profession. Those who are barely making it in the ideal society struggle as it is to find a job so with people coming up with ideas like this i feel as if they are being self- centered and not thinking about those who aren't able to provide for their house-hold as it is now.
If you ask me driverless cars are just another extension for the "new lazy" it narrows down all the way to cellphones and T.V. | 2 |
9df167d | As a driver I feel that transportation is very important when getting to your destination, and feel that it can be improved.
But I also feel that the "driverless car" is not the way to do it.
For one the driverless car is not even driverless, you still need a driver and it questions the safety of the driver and those in the car.
First of all the car still requires a driver, which if we are talking about a driverless car, is useless.
The text states that the car will notify the driver, when to shift gears and take over the navigating, when driving through work zones and around accidents.
By doing so it is not an actual driverless car if it still has to notify the driver to switch gears, to drive.
This also leads to my second point, which questions the driver's safety.
It is said that the car will notify the driver when to drive, with a vibration that is being given off by his or her seat.
Therefore not knowing or feeling the vibration, to alert the driver the are going to switch gears to drive the car, can lead to a major car accident.
That being said it is not the best idea to carry out this experiment involving the driverless car, since it is not actually a driverless car and questions the safety of the people in the car. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.