essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
d871f4e | Electoral college... what a compromise! the electoral college should be removed and replaced by the popular vote for the president because our votes don't really count and the electors are not always fair.
In the passage it had said "you help choose your state's electors when you vote for the president because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate electors." This means our votes are not really counting. The state electors are the ones who are actually selecting the president for us. Candidates don't spend time in states that they have no chance of winning. Putting the fate of presidency in the hands of a few swing votes is rediculous. The electoral college is irrational and doesn't show much of reality. Some people tend to lose interest in the president's because of the way they feel about their votes. Thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election and vote directly instead for representitives to do so. People have refused to vote for party candidates and wan't to cast a vote for whomever they please. There are over sixty percent of people that would perfer a direct election to the kind we have now.
Another reason why electoral college should get replaced is because it is not fair sometimes. "can voters control whom their electors vote for? not always. Do voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate? sometimes." This is the disater factor, it is hardly expected to reflect on the will of the people. A large state gets more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign than small states do. At times a presidents can have more popular votes and the other less fewer electoral votes and the one with the popular votes lose and that only happened once. In run off elections if people know that their vote will not have an effect and think its unfair than they have less incentive to pay attention to any compaign than they would if the president were picked by popular votes. Potential voters will turn off the electoral method if they know a candidate has not hope of building up their state.
That is why electoral votes should be replaced with popular votes for the president because most of the time our votes do not count and it is unfair to us. | 4 |
d878b34 | Many people think that this is a alien formed face noooo. I claim that this is a natural landform. We have taken many pictures and it has faded away more every time we take a picture of it. There are some many reasons of how this face was a natural landform.
First, This natrual landform was not form by alein becuase in the pictures you see a small mountain or big hill , but here in the USA, there are many of thoes big hills or small mountains. They are mostly around the American west. It is a lava dome that are on the USA too. and they are the same height. So that face on that hill is not alone.
Next, Another reason on how that natrual landform is natural not made by aliens is that every time we take a picture over the years the face is always fadeding away so if an alien created it why would he just leave it there just to faded away.
They would of kept it alive.
Last, I can see on how somebody could think this was formed by an alien but how do you explain that the eyes are just shadows. They are formed from the nearby rock. Plus the mouth and nose are also formed by the nearby rock shadow. So the mouth, nose and eyes are not really even there they are just shadows
In conclusion, I am telling the alien face that was on mars was just a lava dome. And its eyes nose mouth were just shadows. Plus the picture just started fading away through the years. This is how the Face was not made by aleins but was a natural landform | 3 |
d88b728 | Dear, State Senator
I have come to a conclusion that keeping the Eletoral College would be a much better process instead of an unorganized popular vote. The electoral college is a great process with the votes in congress and a vote of the qualified cictizens. It is more organized with five benifits of certainity of outcome, trans- regonal appeal, winner-take-all method, big states, and avoiding run-off elections. These benifits help the elections go more smoothly. The Electoral College process has a selection of electors that vote for president and vice president, and the counting of electoral votes by congress.
" The dispute over outcome of an electoral college is possible if it happened in 2000 but is less likley than a dispute over the popular vote". "For example, Obama got sixty-one point seven percent of the electoral vote to only fofty-one point three percentof popular votes cast frm him and Romney... "
So the reason for a less likley dispute over a popular vote is because of the winning candidates share of the electoral college. Basically and eletoral vote can be tied by the total number of votes. Even fivehundred thirtyeight is an even number and also unlikely.
"The electoral college requires for a presidental candidate to have trans-regional appeal."
None of the regions have enouough electoral votes to elect a president. So, a regional favorite has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states, and also gains no electoral votes by increasing his plurality in states he knows he will win in only. It results to just regional apeal and is unlikely going to be a successful president. The residents of other regionds are most likley going to feel like there votes do not count, the new president will have no regards for there intersts, and he is not realy their president.
" The winner- take-all methode of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates-as we saw in 2012's election-to focus their campaign efforts on the toss-up states."
The toss-states mostly pay more attention to the campaign and listen to the competitors and they know thay are going to decide the election. They are the most thoughtful voters and they have the most informationand attention. These states should be the ones to decide the election.
Big states get some of the weight restored in political balance by population and lose by virtue of mal-apportionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution.
"The popular vote was very close in Florida in 2012; nevertheless Obama, who won that vote, got 29 electoral votes."
The electoral college also aviods problems of eletions, which no candidate will recieve the majority of votes.
"There is a pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins the majority of the votes cast..."
Pressure can greatly complicate presidential election precess, it is avoided to produce a clear winner. Keep the Electoral college for all of these benifits that make the election process easier for electors and candidates the t chose the electors.
Sincerly, PROPER_NAME | 3 |
d88e664 | I think I need to get people to join because people needs our help and they need food and i need to help the people becauseIi travled all the way from new orleans and
their not that much people and they might die and they are injured animals need to be saved and they need to be warm and take care of and people say no about helping I will try to talk to them about helping and all of that
it is very sad that the people has to deal with that war and thats why i need helper thank you for your time. but one more thing please if anyone just join today I will be so glad those people dont need to be in the war thank you. I got to see venice and greece and germany and all of that it was awful seeing the ruins in the countrys.
I helped people like giving them food and shelter building them homes and giving tthem water food and shelter and I help the animals I took care of them and one more thing i was helping a animal and the ship shook very hard and a piece of metal jabed me in the ribs so I could not work for a couple of weeks. | 2 |
d88f3fc | Dear Senator,
I think that we should change over to election by popular vote. I thinks that because in the Electoral College the voters dont vote on the president, but instead they vote on the electors who then vote for the president. "It's official: the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. "The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense....it is the electors who elect the president, not the people. There are five reasons for getting rid of the Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigree; all are preactical, not liberal or conservative reasons. Some people disagree though they think that we should stick with the electoral college. They think its a good way to do the voting because they get to choose the electors who will choose our president. Inconclusion, I think that we should do election by popular vote because then the voters get to choose the president.
Sincerly,
Britney | 2 |
d8a1d51 | I personaly don't think this is a good idea just yet. I think it may be to early to have someone just not have to pay attention to the road and trust a robot to get you where we need to go. I know that most people use a GPS and I guess that is considered a way of robots taking you where you need to go, I just think there is too much conflict in having the robot actually controling your vehicle because whose fault would it really be?
I think paragraph 9 has good examples of why it could lead to something bad, because in some states there are already laws against this kind of technology which I don't think we should necasarily push towards. There is also the safety isue into whose fault is it really if you get into a wreck, becuase what happens if you wreck with another car? There are usually three questions: was it my fault, was it their fault, or was it this robots fault? There is no telling what these cars can do if something in the system fails, and how exactly hard are these things to hack? Overall I just don't think that any of us are ready for this kind've risk, but I do see this kind've thing happening in the future. | 2 |
d8a2b0d | The face on the planet is just a natural landform, it just happened to form like a face, because of how the shadows where formed by the small hills.
Acording to the imformation in the article, the image just looks like a face, because how the rocks are formed and the shadows. "It is just another martian mesa, common enogh around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows". The shadows gave the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. Also the camera did not have the best pixels and they where far away from the planet, so the picture was not the best. It was also a cloudy time of the year on the red planed "April '98". The camera had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face.
What the picture actually shows is the Martain equivalent of a butte or mesa, landforms common around the American West. This is why it is just a natural landform, and not made by the aliens. | 2 |
d8a5142 | NASA's first time going to mars was in 1976 when they were just going around taking photos then they spotted something on mars. They didnt know what it was at first they thought maybe it was aliens so they took the photo,and a few days later NASA unrevailed the image for everybody to see.
The caption noted a huge rock formation whitch resembeled a human head. the human head was formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,mouth,and nose. Michaels team MOC snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site revealing a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
the team would have known if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian style pyramids or even small shacks. You could see what they were.The picture was revailed and they did figure out what it was. it was a butte or messa in the martian's. Buttes or mesas are just land forms common around the Amereican West.
You could actually find the spot that the picture was taken of. The face was found at 41 degrees north martian latitude. It was winter in april of 98 a cloudy time of the year. So it was difficult for them to get a actually good picture of the face. NASA wasnt even out looking for the face. They were just taking photos and thats when the face was shown.
NASA went out again on April 8,2001 thats when they attempted the picture again. The picture came out perfect this time. and that was when the picture of the face was discovered and NASA said that the face was just a butte are mesa. everybody thought it was aliens,nobody would have thought that a fave 2 miles long would be a landform.
Michaels team thouht that NASA made a mistake so they went out and took another picture but this time the picture was 10 times as strong as jsut a regular picture. You could actually see pyramids Shacks anything that would have been there from aliens. They didnt find anything anything strange are anything and they did there research to and thats when they said NASA was right. it was just a butte are mesa. the people on the enternet were shocked.
They said no aliens had to of put the face on Mars. it wasnt landforms it was alien activity. but they were proven wrong when NASA put the picture up for everybody to see. Thats when they beleived that it was just a 2 mile long landform and that the only reason it looked like a face was because the shadow was a illusion that made it look like a face. | 2 |
d8a6d62 | The "Face on Mars" is a natural landform. Many critics think that it is a sign of life on Mars. The Face was discovered in 1976. Since then it has become a pop icon. Appearing in a Hollywood film, books, magazines, and radio talk shows. This natural ladscape is simply a Martian mesa.
The Face is a Martian mesa."What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West."(12) The comparing and contrasting of the Face and a natural lanscape on earth shows that Garwin know what he is talking about."It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho."(12) Scientist figure it was just another Martian mesa, but only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh.
"Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars-evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists."(5) The NASA would certainly take credit for finding alien activity on Mars. The finding wouldn't only be an advantage but it would reward fairly. If the NASA had intended to hide the discovery, they would not have shared it in the first place.
People do have reason to oppose this argument otherwise. The "Face on Mars" does look like alien activity. "...wich resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth."(3)
Therefore the "Face on Mars" is simply a natural landform. NASA would not keep this from the world. It is simply a Martian mesa. | 3 |
d8a95e6 | The Facial Action Coding System is a good systyem you should put into society hands.It would help so many people out that are not that good releasing your feelings out. People would learn how to talk or how to cact around that person. Such as when they could anliysed Mona lisa face was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful,and 2 percent ang
It could be a huge game in the world to help people out that have something bothering them. Also it could be a big factor as even lower the sucide rate becasue then you would kknow if qa person is feeling depressed or mad. a person would be able to help someone by just doing a face scan and not saying a word because even though you could just talk some people are not comfortable with expressing theirs selfs.
This system should really get brought into the society, it could help so many people in so many different ways that could befit us and them. people would feel more comfortable if they didnt have to talk as much if you knew how they where feeling and you approach them they right whay. | 2 |
d8ac048 | Dear, State Senator
The voting of the president every four years is one of the most important events of American history. However I feel that it has become unfair and a volatile way of voting.
I believe that we the people should rid ourselves of the electoral college and turn to the popular vote instead. Too many events concerning the need for this change have been caused by the electoral college. Even Nixon who was caught up in a electoral vs. popular vote dispute said "aboilish the electoral college.".
First and foremost the fact that the peolpe do not vote for the president is a worying factor when the presidential election comes around. The people vote on an electoral slate of electors who may or may not actually vote for the president you want perhaps deciding to "defy the will of the people"from source 2 and vote against their political party. also you dont have the power to decide which candidates will be running so the people who will vote for your president are possibly unrelateable politicians who may be waiting to turn against the political party they belong to. there is the very likely posibility based on the information in source 2 staing that "During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states diddnt see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets diddnt get to see a single coampaign add.". personally I dont know how anybody would be able to make the correct descision when electing a elector based on what you may hear about them from a friend a couple states over who may or may not have seen the candidates. Although highly unlikely, a tie in the electoral college would mean the unbalancing of power between states.
overall the electoral college is unfair and needs to be replaced by the will of the people and not the will of a masked politician. | 3 |
d8b1f47 | I will be talking to you about the face on mars. Some people think that it was made by alines but i am here to put those stories to rest. We have made a resent break through on if it was or was not, and truns out it was not it was just a land formation. See there are a lot of stuff that can be formed from earth that was formed by God like the Grand Canyon, or Mount Everus. So it is just a land formation, from where meterites have struck it from be hind and it kept posting out more and more. Over time just like it showes in the picture in 1976 it was juat stearthing out and in. 1998 you saw more it was not until March 24,2001, that it began to look like a face ,but in 2001 we were able to dipic the picture, and then see it was a face inside it. And in all thoes movies well they are just movies and no one besides God can do that kind of moreaculus stuff like what he did with us he is the only one treu creator. | 1 |
d8b2798 | I am for driverless cars. I think that it's incredible that our technology is becoming so advanced and that we know how to create such a legendary car. In paragragh two, it's said that television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves and it's finally becoming a reality.
There are pros and cons of this idea. Even though I think a driverless car is a good idea there needs to be improvements and more work on these cars. A pro of this invention is it can take you where you need to go and is pretty much safe. For example, a driverless car would be great for someone that is intoxicated that needs to go home. Even if someone is intoxicated that person would still need a designated driver because the car needs a human driver that must remain alert and ready to take over when the situation requires, as stated in paragragh 7. Another pro, which is stated in paragragh 8, is "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 drivers need to take over- something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone." That is a great safety feature about this car. Most car accidents are from texting and driving and with this system it can end texting accidents. A con of the driverless car is that it still needs improvements. This car is not completely ready to be sold in dealerships. To ride in this car the human driver must stay alert and pay attention at all times.
With everything said about this driverless car I think it's a great idea and should keep being improved so it can be in dealerships. In my opinion it will be the best car out there and less accidents will happen. Can't wait for what our technology can officially do for us. | 3 |
d8b4704 | Everyone has their good times and their bad showing many mixed emotions. People will show emotions, and sometimes they wont. There are so many emotions; bored, happy, sad, angry, confused, scared, and your telling me that this "Facial Action Coding System" can detect them all? Putting "technology to read the emotional expressions of a student" is a big NO. Even at times we don't know how we feel, how can a computer tell us what we feel.
These computers being able to identify human emotions is scary if you think about it. Over the pass ten years the interenet has become a real popular thing. People use it to socialize and play game, but what happens when someone loses in a game or doesnt agree with what someone else is saying. We have a reaction thats not exspected. People can be very agressive verbaly through the interent. Because of the interent there have been more suisides now then there has ever been. Knowing how you feel could increase the risk of suside and/or thoughts of suiside considering over half of the worlds population has depression. (which can lead to suiside)
Even if this "Facial Action Coding System" can detect our feelings what actions are going to be taken. Even though "Alto" did say "A classroom computer could recongnize when a student is becoming bored, Dr. Huang predicts. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."
They didn't give any imformation on how they are going to do that. It sounds like when they say "like an effective human instuctor" they are refering to a robot which has no expresion in its voice. That would make someone not pay attention even more the voice would be very boring causing the student to doze off even more.
Sometimes Schools are more poor then other and have no way of paying for computers. This softwear "Facial Action Coding System" could cost money they never adressed cost in the article. This would also be something that the teacher and students would have to adapt to as well. Where just now getting laptops and Ipads into schools to "better push education." I read a study over E-Learning vs Paper. They took a group of students of the same grade level, and split them into two groups. Gave them both the same exact passage with the same exact questions, but one was all on the computer while the other one is on paper. When the results came back from both groups more kids on paper did better. Not only do kids learn better using paper we save money from having to buy computers that may have been broken or damaged.
People need to experince all of these different kinds of emotions to be able to handle these experinces. Without these experinces when something where to happen we wouldnt be able to handle it. If we continue with using "Facial Action Coding System"
Suiside rates could go up. Using this in classroom could also make students get less infomration by not being able to focus on what's being tought to them.
Not everyone lives in the riches places would this program be able to be funded to schools or pay through the goverment.
This is somthing that we should not go on forward with because doing so may make us suffer the effects of the future causing the people of our future to be looked down upon. | 5 |
d8b6e7a | I think these cars could be dangerous because they drive on their own. Anything could happen with a driverless car. It could mess up a turn or anything and could crash. It sounds like a good invention but having a car you have no control over driving sounds a bit scary. I mean what would you do if you couldnt stop the car? These driverless cars they are making are controlled by a computer. What would people with driverless cars do if the computer controlling their car just crashed , or stopped working. These cars could put someone in danger all because they have no control over it.
In the text they talk about how the more smarter cars needed a lot of sensors for the startes to work. How would you feel about a car that starts itself? Think about it! Yes , it does sound nice but anything could happen to those sensors. If something were to happen to those sensors how would the car start? You'd pretty much be carless unless you took all that extra stuff out. There are alot of things that could come with having driverless car.
If I were a person who sells and advertises people to buy cars I most defintiely would not recommend them to buy a driverless car, it sounds scary and dangerous to me. The things they are coming out with now and days are crazy. It just doesn't sound like something thats safe to me. What if parents had there kids in the car and something just went wrong with the car all because they had control and it cause an accident? Their would be nothing they could do. In paragraph 7 it says " All driverless cars are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills , if its a driverless car which should function on its own why would it need human skills. It must not be too good to drive its ownself.
I would just reconsider it on a safety level, to be on the safe side. Some things don't sound right. Can't trust everything just because it looks and sounds nice, looks can be very deceiving. Just because they say the car is good doesn't mean it is. People always make things sound so good just to get you to buy them. That's just like the saying " everything that glitters isn't gold" meaning just because it looks good doesn't mean it is. It would be crazy riding in a driverless car if you were on the highway during rush-hour. How would the car know if you needed to get over or not? How would it know where to take you? I would feel more comfortable riding in a car where i can drive for myself. Maybe I'm just used to the normal driving , anything after that sounds crazy.
In the beginning of paragraph 8 they asked the question " Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?" "Wouldnt drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" I think many people would get bored sititng in a car they couldn't drive until it was needed. It just sounds pretty pointless to me. Your sitting behind a wheel and your not able to drive until it tells you to. If i had the chance I wouldn't ride in it. I wouldn't want a car telling me when I can and cannot drive.
In paragraph 7 they say how if you were in danger the car would alert the driver to be ready to drive, but if the car is so good like they say why would the car need to alert the driver to drive when its a driverless car. When I think of the word driverless I think of a no-driving car where you have to do no driving , all you do is sit back and ride. Theres something that is not to good about the car if you have to drive it why its driverless. | 4 |
d8b7938 | The Face on Mars is not an alien monument or creation. A lot of people do think that it was made by some alien life form but they are mistaken. Scientists have done multiple studies to conclude that it is a natural landformation.
First of all, the formation is known as a mesa. There are shadows from the formation that give the illusion of eyes, a mouth, and a nose. Also in the picture from 2001 each pixel in the photo graph is 1.56 meters on the planet so you would be able to see any artifacts or structures if there were any.
In conclusion, the Face on Mars is not an alien formation. Scientists have proven this by the effect of the shadows on the rock, the fact that it is a mesa, and by there not being any artifacts on or around the formation. Therefore, this is not evidence of there being ancient civilizations on Mars. | 2 |
d8ba484 | I have been to tons of places around the world. I would want lots of people to be a Seagoing Cowboy. I got to visit Europe and China. Then we would go help others after wars. I would help by giving food supply and animals to people who needed them. You could do the same too.
However, we got to see the Acropolis in Greece. Our crew also got to go on a Gondola ride in Venice to Italy. Then we went to a castle in Crete and to Panama Conal. The crew would help animals that we would bring on the ship to send to other countries. We would spend the rest of our time playing fun games together.
When I got to help people I also got to see that part of the country. I have made nine trips. More than any of other Seagoing Cowboy. You could probably go on more trips. We had to have 335 horses and food to take to Greece. Before that, we had to report to New Orleans.
When I turned 18 I could've been drafted to military but when they learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip they didn't make me. I was already helping other people out there. We helped people by recovering their food supplies, animals, and more. So you should benefit others and join us. It would help us and other people out there.
If you enter the Seagoing Cowboys you could sight all the countries in the world. You would also get to help others that have been hurt, and raise animals to give to others. This is a great way of helping other people with out anything. You would also get to explore other parts of the world. This is why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys. | 3 |
d8be4d2 | The author claims that Venus can be our escape plan if earth becomes unhabitle .He supports this by explaining to us that NASA has made many attemps for a spacecraft to land and collect samples for people to study. But due to the extreme heat ,that ranges over 800 degrees. And pressure that is 90 times heavier than what we have here on earth. Is basically impossible for a spacecraft to survive.
Many plans ideas and plans are being put into perspective like a mechanical computers. That can stand the heat from Venus. And there's also an Idea of a blimp
to travel in ,instead of touching the surface.Even with all these great ideas,there are limits to what we can do.Heat and pressure are not the only setbacks. There are active valcanoes ,powerful earthquakes and even lighting. The possibilities to living there are slim to none.The only reason Venus is being considered is becouse it's closer.
Maybe there will be one day where a man set's foot on mars and a famous line that will be put into the history books ,or internet. Depending on how long it takes. Mankind has done impecable things. And venus is just gonna be the next milestone | 2 |
d8c4ec2 | Residents in Vauban, Germany dont own a car and thats about of 70%. There would be 57% of people who would sell their car to just move there. People arnt allowed to street park there cars, put them in driveways and garages "near the French and Swiss borders. People who have and drive cars make the air have pollution. In Paris people were told to abbandon their cars or have to face a $31 fine. There were at least 4,000 people who got fined and 27 people got their car impounded from the reaction of the fine. There was congestion that was down 60 percent in the capital of France. When they had cold nights and warm days it was due to to the warmer layer of air that can trap the car emmisions. It would be easier to think than a car free.
In Bogota Columbia they have banned cars for 3 straight years. It would be a good time for the people to take away their stress and lower the air pollution that is being caused by this. Alot of people from different cities came to join the event. Because of this the day without cars made a huge improvement capaign that started in Bogota. Now the parks and sport centers that grew with bad uneven sidewalks have been replaced by new smooth sidewalks. Plus rush hour laws have made resturants and shopping places came up. With all of this happening it has made a change for everyone to enjoy what they didnt have before.
Authorites from othere contries came from Bogota to take a look at the event. It made a revolutionary change and has been crossing Borders. From pollution in the air that people cant stand to nice weather where people can go outside to enjoy. It has shown there has been a drop in the percentage of people that are 16 to 39 are getting there license. It has shown that people would organize summer jobs of their own or use the public transportationo or organize a car pool with friends. A study has shown that driving by young went down 23 percent in 2001 and 2009. People would be parterning with telecommunications industry to make cities so that pedestrians, bicyles, private cars are connected to a network to save time to conserve resources and to lower emissions and most important to improve safety. | 1 |
d8c9e3d | The devlopment of driverless cars should not be continued due to, conflicts with traffic laws, the failure and price of the technology required and the ambiguoity of who is at fault in times of accidents.
Traffic laws are designed to secure the safety of all drivers on the rode, but said laws can become irrelevant if the driver does not have complete control of his or her vehicle. The text states, "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." This piece of text evidence exemplifies how lawmakers pass driving laws with the mindset the driver is alert while on the road; however driverless cars do not require the driver to be alert, which could result in accidents in the future. The text also states, "...traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. As a result in most states it is illegal to even test computer driven cars." From this example we have insight on how lawmakers make laws: with the assumption that all cars have a human driver. If the human driver is taken out of the equation, then the safety of others on the road simply cannot be guaranteed with a car operating on its own.
Technology works to our benefit at times, but it is not flawless. The text Sebastian Thrun says, "...Radar was a device on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars. It wasn't something you could bay at Radio Shack." In other words Trun is telling about the price of such techonology and it was not an item average people could just buy. The text also states, "...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 motion sensor.... LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form constantly updatint 3-D model of the car's surroundings." From this example we receive insight on the intricate technology involved in making a such a car run. Most people would argue that the technology is tested and proven safe; however, the fact lingers that technology can fail at unpredictable times. The price of the technology required to run the driverless car, as well as the possible failure in technology will remain an obstacle.
When accidents happen, in most cases the driver at fault can be determined; this becomes ambigious with driverless cars. The text states, "[With driverless cars] new laws will be needed to cover liability in the case of an accident." This example shows how new laws would need to be passed to determine who is held accountable at times of accidents. The text also states, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?" This example shows how it can be unclear in times of accidents if who is to blame for accidents, and in extreme cases even the manufacturers could even be blamed. Drvierless cars would raise a new issue of requiring new traffic laws and the ambigiouity of who is responsible when accidents occur.
The development of driverless cars should not be continued due to, conflicts with current traffic laws, the failure and sheer price of the technology required to run the vehhicle, and the ambigiouity of who is liable at times of accidents. | 4 |
d8cf53c | I am against delevopling these driverless cars. I believe that they are inferior to manual driving.I believe that it wouldnt be safe. If one company uses the technology and mass produces these cars. As everyone believes the hype they buy the car, then it malfunctions and causes many crashes then many people wont believe in the selfless driver car after that. also we would have to spend money on making better roads everywhere so the can funtion the same everywhere. Then what if the driverless car cant react to a human driver in a situation. Then machine must be really advanced to recogize the drivers actions and then react.it wouldnt be abled to. Also could it react to drunk drivers? or any reckless drivers?
All in all i dont see driverless cars as being great. I see too many problems,and
risks for this to work. Maybe it would be when we are more sure have better technology. | 2 |
d8d0cc3 | The Facial Action Coding System would be very valuable in classrooms. This device would let teachers understand student feeling better. To which would let the teachers be able to switch up how they teach that student . This device also uses a very reliable computer program to calculate the face muscles. This would make it the most relatable to human facial muscles.
Finally, this device has many benefits to it such as, reading emotional expressions and even telling if there faking that expression.
This use of this technology would benefit teachers by letting them know how the students feel. "By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions"(D'Alto).For example lets say a student is feeling fustrated on a test, so he might show he's happy so the teacher wont come question him. The teacher can use the FACS device and understand exactly how the student is feeling. Instead of him thinking that the student is happy he could look on the device and it would tell him exactly what he feels and what percent of all the emotions take up. Overall, this Facial Action Coding System would be very beneficial in the classroom.
Another way this technology is benefical would be the calculations of the muscles of your face. What this means is the device would " constructs a 3-D computer model of the face"(D'Alto). This model would show your face muscles and it would calculate how the are moved or know as "action unit". Then based on the movement of those muscles .The FACS device would list one of the" six basic emotions happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadeness"(D'Alto). Finally, the last step to FACS device would be to get the results on that perticular person emotions.
In conclusion, this Facial Action Coding System would be valuable to classrooms. This device seems to be very reliable and can be used in many ways to just reading emotions all the way to using in drama class to react an emotion more realistic. | 3 |
d8d10fa | I think driverless cars are not usuful right now and that they should not let people drive a driverless car on the streets, because a person still needs to be in the car and must remain alert in case he needs to take control of the car, driverless cars are not 100% safe, and it will cause a lot of confusion in case of accident.
Driverless cars are useless, because a person needs to be in car and must remain alert in case he needs to take control of the car, as the text says: "This means the human driver must remain alert and ready to take over when the situation requires",this does not make a huge difference between that and driving, also people would be very unconfortable and insecure about what could happen. Once i watched a video about a peron testing the autopilot mode on a Tesla, and most of the time he was insecure putting his hands on the wheel in case something happens.
They should not let people use driverless cars on the streets, becuase they are not 100% safe, driverless cars are safe in unreal sitions and in places without other cars, as the text says "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents" this makes the car not safe. Also the car knows the streets and the buildings, but it does not know about others cars, or people that can intercept the car and that would not give enough time for the car to react.
Driverless cars are useless and they should not let poeple use them on the streets, because there would be a lot of confusion in case of accident, as the text says "If the technology fails and someone is infured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?" the laws are not ready for driverless cars, and in case of accident it would depend of a lot of factors to find out who was the responsable of the accident.
To sum up, driverless cars could be a very useful technology, but they have to inprove a lot more to be driven in the streets. | 3 |
d8d2d90 | Join. You should join or participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. This is an opportunity of a lifetime, so you can join. "I'm grateful for the opportunity, it made me more aware of the people of other countries and their needs." said Luke Bomberger and "My life changed soon after my high school graduation."
The adventure starts on a cattle boat. "This is an unbelievable opportunity for small-town boys." said Luke. "We help countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more." It will take time to get to places where people might need help, like two weeks to around a month, or even more. If you can last that long on a boat then give this a try. I got to tour unique places like; an excavated castle in Crete and the Panama Canal on my way towards China. Besides helping people, I got to see and experience being in; the Acropolis in Greece, and going on a gondola ride in Venice, Italy. When the animals were unloaded, especially on return trips we would play baseball and volleyball games, where the animals used to be. "Table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games were played to help pass the time on board."
Now that you what happens and what we do, you should join our program. This is an opportunity of your lifetime. "I'm grateful for the opportunity, it made me more aware of the people of other countries and their needs." said Luke Bomberger and "My life changed soon after my high school graduation." It is your choice, to be a cowboy or not. | 2 |
d8d429b | The value of using facial action coding is not completely accurate. We can not rely on an computer to analyze our emotions and expression. A computer is able to recognize all fourty four major musces in the face, but what if its off by one. Computers are able to mess up just like how a human can. There are only six basic emtions that technology is able to detect such as happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. But we know that there are variety of emotions and feelings for humans. What if the emotion the computer gives us is not how we feel? In the text it says that humans are able to detect how someone is feeling based off the expression they have on their face. So what is the point in having a computer do it if we can just do it ourselves. Technology is not always accurate in the text the author is stating all of the information we want to hear but he is not telling what could go wrong. We dont know whehter or not the technology is functional for humans to use or if it runs by itself. The world is already letting technology rule our lives we can not alow it to control how we feel and let it share our feelings. Although this type of technology is amusing it has some flaws to it for example if someone was to use this new technology how would they know how to operate it? Even if the computer gave someone the information on how they were feeling how would that be of any benefit to the person.We will soon become lazy and unable to operate our own bodies.In conclusion there is no value in using facial action coding we can not allow technology to run and do everything for us. | 3 |
d8d8de9 | The planet called " Earth Twin" is called Venus. Venus is the most alike planet to earth density and size. Another name for Venus is the "Evening star" because not only its the closest to look liike eath density ans size it also the closest planet to earth. So at night you can look you and see Venus. Venus even had some space craft send to the planet but noe of the survived the landing on the planet over three decades.
This planet surface and atomspher both have extream conditons. The atomspher of venus is 97 percent carbor doxide and the clouds rain corrosive surface acid. And the surface is over 800 degrees fahreheit and the peressure is 90 time than earth. Even thought Mercury is closter to the sun Venus has the hottest surface. And thats because of the weather patters and the voclanos. Or it because the powerful earth quakes or the lighting strike.
The NASA want to still try to send thing to this planet it lear thing they cant touch. They know the probly they have to solve before they really send anything up there. There was people in the 1800s trying to figur out Venus mistorys and people even going over that to see if they miss anything. Alot of researchers was trying to past the challenge but didnt know how because the heat of the planet was messing upthe rocket they was sending and there tryinh to fiuger out that problem now. | 1 |
d8dc3f8 | The author supports the idea of studying Venus in a descriptive way.
Have you ever wanted to or at least have learned about the other planets in our solar system? Do you know what Venus is? In my opinion I believe that learning more about another planet like Venus is worth knowing about.
i believe this because he's giving us details about our focus, Venus. He explains that Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any other planet in the solar system even though the one planet being close to the sun is Mercury. This is something unique to say about Venus.
In conclusion, the author supports the idea of studying Venus despite the dangers of it because he's being descriptive about Venus and explains more details about it. For example; he says," Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in the solar system." This is something interesting to learn about Venus and thats how well the author supports the idea of studying Venus. | 2 |
d8dfcbc | My dear friend, I know you may think that the "Martian Mesa" is an alien aritifact,but you need to look at the facts there are.
The first picture was taken from the Viking 1 in the year 1976. The photograph isnt very clear which will give you an advantage to pursuade other people that it is an alien artifact. But through out the years the space shuttle Viking 1, has taken a few more pictures. A Viking 1 photo from 1976, a Mars Global surveyor (MGS) image from 1998, and the latest MGS image from 2001. Thanks to new high-resolution images and 3D altimetry from NASA's Mars Global spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa. Also on April, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times more sharper than the original Viking photos! Whe revealed the picture on a JPL web site just to reveal a natural landform. There wasn't any alien monument after all my dear friend. You may say that even on April 8, 2001 MGS drew close enough for a look on the "face". Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. What the picture actuall really showed was the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landroms common around the American West. The mesa in Mars even reminded Garvin of the Middle Butte in the Snake river Plain of Idaho!"
So as you can see I have listed to you all the facts to the best of my knowledge, that in reality the "face" is a Martian butte or mesa. You may choose to still believe in what ever you want to about the "face" and I respect that, so thank you for the time that you gave me to tell you about the mesa/face. | 2 |
d8eb63c | Dear,State Senator
The Elelction of our country's leader is a huge deal. I am writting to you regarding the Electoral College and why it should remain as part of our Presidental election process,The Electoral college allows balance in our elections,As well forces candidates to have regional appeal,and gives people the power.
What if there was no majority vote or if there were to be a tie? the likeliness of this happening with the Electoral College is very low compared to the likeliness of this happening in a Popular vote. Electoral College vote likely exceeds that of the Popular vote.(source 3 paragraph 18)The Electoral College also gives the Larger states a chance to balance out what they've lost in representation in sanate by the constitution meaning they get to express the peoples voices better maybe as well as the small states who have the right amount of senate per population. Balance is very important in all things for a succesful country if the states aren't happy with the amount of voice and say they get in the federal government then we as a country may face instability as a whole.
Presidental canidates are to earn their place and prove why it is that they have what it takes to succesfully run our country. Candidate must earn regional appeal, although no region as the power of Electoral votes to decide the election,it is important that the candidate has is liked by all regions. trans-regional appeal increases the chances of a succesful president, a president who shows intrests in all of his countries interest is a succesful president.(source 3 paragraph 19) A candidate has to seek electoral votes in all states but espeacially the key ones where the voters actually understand their responsibility and actually listen to the campaigns.
This countrys strongly believes in the peoples voices and their input in how their country is ran. the Electoral college gives that power to the people, it allows the people to express their opinion on who thei leader should be. Even thoguh the voters are actually voting for the electors and not the candidate it still gives the people enough control over their government which prevents a tryranny.
Many may argue that some voters aren't well educated and don't have the knowledge need to make the right choice and that they might get confused and make the wrong choice. But this isnt always true because the candidates make sure to focus on the Toss-up states which can define an election, and these are the people who really focus on the camppaign and unedrstand their resposibility to make the right choice as a state.
The Electoral college with out a question should remain in our countrys system, it keeps the balance in all states and strengthens us as a coutry, forces all candiates to have regional appeal to become succesful presidents, and follows our countrys basis a government for the people and by the people. We must keep the Eletoral college! | 5 |
d8f3bd7 | "The founding fathers established it in the constitution as a comprimise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by popular vote of qualififed citizens." (Paragraph 1) The electoral college is made of 538 people called electors, these people are there to take in consideration what the people voted and then they them selves vote physically for the President of the United States. The electoral coolege is good beacuse there is not as much controversey and if its been fine for this long it sould not be changed now.
Controversey, a big word with lots of meaning, but what does it really mean in this context. It is when two or more things are being argued about, in this case two politacal veiws. Whether or not we should keep the electoral college or get rid of it and go back to popular vote for electing the President of the United States. Having a little bit of controversey is good but the reason why the founding fathers made this into the constitution is to stop the out rageuos argueing that was going on when electing the First president. It states in paragraph 3 ,"The electoral college consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president." This shows that they didnt just make it to please one side of the arguement, this pleased both side because it was very fare and didnt favor one side to the other. By doing this it nearly ended all of the argueing and controversey, which that is what they wanted to acomplish.
Futhermore, the electoral college is good because why would you change something that has been working perfectly and helped the voting process out tremdously over hundreds of years. They have had voting for the President down to a science now, for example,"The presidential election is held every four years on the tuesday after the first monday in november." (paragraph 6) Everyone in the U.S. knows this date, it is imprinted in our brain when that day is and we need to clear our calenders and turn on the grill because that is a very specail day of change for our beautiful country.
Many people say there are problems with the electoral college, then again there are problems with everything in this crazy world we live in. "The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century." (paragraph 11) Yes there was a crisis but to say that the electoral college is corupt and bad just cause of that fiasco is to far. America is too strong to break down from just that and there are to many belivers in the electoral college to have it just fall to peices from that one problem. It also shows the resliency of the electoral college, and not just that but also showing changes so that those crisises wont ever happen again. "Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors..." That is living proof that there are changes and fixes being made to further the effiency of the Electoral College.
All in all the electoral college has proven itself to be more then just helpful but it has changed America itself. It was made to settle a comprimise made but it has settled more arguements then anyone can count. Its proven to the world it is here to stay and is not leaving anytime soon. | 4 |
d8f9c47 | The advantages of limiting car usage would be less pollution, less traffic, and less money involved. For example, in the German suburbs, large garages that are at the end of development where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home. So cut down cost on that Germany people have given up their cars.
Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district on the outskirts of Freiburg, near the French and Swiss borders. That doesn't mean that car ownership is not aloud but there is only two places to park, large garages and homes. This cuts down on money costs for Germany by a long shot because with no cars then people don't have to spend money on gas, and Germany's streets will be safe without the cars messing up the roades and less car accidents will occur. Although citics may say that it will be difficult for people to get around, it stands that people are just happier this way. For example, Heidrum Walter is a media trainer and a mother of two says, "when I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way."
In Paris, they enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city, after days of near-record pollution. Motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). Same for the odd-numbered plates the following day. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined. Which is an effective way to lessen pollution in Paris since it is so polluted in the first place. They also said it was easier to imagine than a car-free Champs-Elysees. Doing this got them great results as well, congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France after five days of intensifying smog, which is rivaled by Beijing, China for being known as one fo the most polluted cities in the world. The smog was cleared enough on Monday for the ruling French party to recind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday.
In Bogota, Colombia millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day. Which left the Colombian streets devoid of traffic jams. Traffic jams are pretty annoying and no one wants to go through them so making up a day like this is extremely good for the environment and for your phyci as well. If people would violate this day they would get charged $25 fines. Carlos Arturo Plaza, a businessman said, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," so doing this day it would make people more relaxed and happy but also be good to the enviroment just like in Germany.
In the end of the day, it is important to know that all of these things these countries are doing are for the good of the world. It is good that it is more of a mandatory participation then a optional objective so that people won't take global warming seriously even though it is. | 4 |
d8fe8c6 | Do you want to see a lot of cool places and help out people? If you do then join the Seagoing Cowboys program. I think that you should be in the Seagoing Cowboys program because you will see a lot of unique cool places. You get to help different people. You also get to do a lot of fun things while adenturing.
Some of the places that I saw was the Acropolis in Greece, I went on the gondola ride in Venice, Itally, and I also toured an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China. Another reason you should be in the Seagoing Cowboys program is that you get to help other countries in need and you also help the people that lost mostly everything in the World War 2.
You should also join because you get to do farming and if you did that when you were little and have been experienced then you will know what to do. You also learn things while you are in the Seagoing Cowboys program. If you like farm animals then the Seagoing Cowboys program is for you. You have to enjoy ships if you do this program because you will be on a ship for a while.
When you are on the ship you get to do a lot of stuff to pass the time like you can play different types of games with other people on the ship. You can play games such as table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games. You can also play baseball and volleyball. You get to see exciting things on the way to different destinatons. You also get to go to different destinations all around the world.
When you are a Seagoing Cowboy it is more than an adventure to some people. You get to learn more about the world. You get to do stuff with different people around the world. You get to have an awesome opportunity. But most importantly you get to help other people suffering from loss around the world. | 3 |
d8ff78a | I had so much fun and amazing expirences being a Seagoing Cowboy. Maybe you should try it sometime. I have many reasons why. I will put them down below.
In this expirence, I got to help people. I have also crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and the Pacific Ocean twice to help people affected by the World War II. It feels nice to get to help people for free. It makes me feel like a good person. Maybe you should try this. It is also fun on board. The text states, " Luke also found time to have fun on board, especially on return trips aftr the animals have been unloaded. "
Maybe if you gave being a Seagoing Cowboy a try, it might help your future. Also you might even have a story like this one made from it. Give it a swing! Maybe you will encourage others after you tried. It does not hurt to try! | 2 |
d9040ef | There is a face on Mars, and us humans can not decide if it was made by aliens or if it was made naturaly. In the pictures my crew (NASA) and I took may look like it has changed over the years but it really has not changed at all. Our picture in 1976 has a lack of good quality. From that point forward our quality has got a lot more visible.
I believe the face on Mars is a natural landform, and also there are no aliens up on Mars to make this face.
The face on Mars is a natural landfrom because in paragraph seven in the article states, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform.
There was no alien monument after all." That is saying no alien was up there to create the landform. If there was aliens up there NASA would have annouced it. We NASA have taken pictures of Mars and have not seen any aliens upon there.
Also stating in paragraph eleven "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" Saying that if there are aliens on Mars you would be able to see them on there, but you can not.
So, proven right there that there are not aliens on Mars plain and simple. This face is popular as it gets! Everyone needs to know it was not created by aliens because if it was we would already know by now in this point in time. That face on Mars is not made by aliens, it is made natural.
The face on Mars is made naturaly simple as that I can not get more simple than that.
I a NASA scientist believe that it was made naturaly no figure, no alien was up on Mars physically making faces on Mars. If we were to go up to Mars right now we would not see any alien. Anytime you hear "Aliens on Mars created the face of Mars" just know it is a myth. There is no aliens up on Mars, and there will never be aliens on Mars. | 3 |
d90758e | it was 1995, world war ll was over in europe, and many countries were left in ruiens to help these countries you woiuld need to send many,many us army troops out to save them from all of that stuff ,like rocks that might have fallen on them and other stuff that might have harm them or others in there country ,luke was 18 before arriving in greece with means he could dafted for the military services when my draft board learned that i was. on cattel boat trip they told me just keep doing what i was, doing for my service the cattel boat trips were amazing for a small town boy like luke , he could learn. new things it was almost like he was a tourest when luke was helping out katie that was his aunt she owned a farm as a boy luke was hard working and brave but the sea's were , to dangerous for luke he could not handle it the first couple of days luke was happy with his job but as it got harded luke got more sad and unhappy with his job but being sea going cowboys was too much fun there was much mor to it thsn just having fun . | 1 |
d9111ae | "Venus is a simple to see from the distance but safe vantage point of the earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine closely"
Venus the closest planet to the earth is our neighbord that has the same density and size as the earth it's like our twin in the space, But Venus has many differences to our planet because the humans are trying to explore and discover new thing about our neighbord "Venus" but it's a challenge
to humans and our technology.
Venus it's a very dangerous place to humans explore that's why
NASA send robots and advanced technology to explore to us , but it's not imposible to humans can travel to Venus. It's the surface of Venus and the extreme temperatures like averages over 800 degrees fahreheits and the atmospheric preassure is 90 times grater than that our planet that's why has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system,while humans had many posibilities to travel to Venus and live Because long time
ago Venus was covered by oceans and maybe various forms of life as earth, In the novadays venus has a familiar features as the earth like valleys,mountains and craters.
Venus a planet where has many posibilities to live with not easy conditions,but survivable for humans, The human curiosity are trying to find new ways of life to the future. | 2 |
d914e6f | Venus, sometimes called the “Evening Star,” is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot.However, the nickname is misleading because Venus is actually a planet.Venus is the second planet from our sun, and it has proved a very challenging place to make us examine more closely.
Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density,size, and occasionally the closest in distance.Because Venus is sometimes right around the corner, humans have sent numerous spacecrafts to land on Venus.However, each mission was unmanned.The reason why it was unmanned is because no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours.It may explain why not a single spaceship has landed on Venus in more than three decades.
These are the reasons why studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers.First, long ago, Venus was probably covered with oceans and could have supported so many forms of life, just like Earth.Second, Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, considering the long time frames of space
travel.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA) has one great idea for sending humans to study Venus.Their possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray.At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of a sea level on Earth.Solar power would be plentiful, and the radiation would not exceed Earth levels.It is not easy conditions, but it is survivable for us humans.
However,peering at Venus from a ship orbiting safely far above the planet could provide only limited insight on ground conditions.Researchers cannot take samples of rock,gas, or anything else, from a distance.Therefore, scientists that are seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus,they would need to get up close, despite the risks.
NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus.Some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating Venus's surface and lasted for three weeks.Another project is an old technology called 'mechanical computers'.These devices make calculations by using gears and levers and don't require electronics at all.Systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure,heat, and other forces.
Human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.Our travels on Earth and other planets should not stop us by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet wonderful edges of imagination and innovation. | 4 |
d9192d6 | Lots of people think the face on Mars is an alien or something else,its really not. The face on Mars is not an alien because there is no proof of it being an alien. Only few people have said it looked like an alien,but they have no proof of that being true. Lots of scientist and NASA have proof that its not an alien and that it is something else thats there. People who think that the face is an alien, they are wrong.
The face on Mars is not an alien because NASA said it was a sort of rock formation. Also that it looked like a human head. NASA never said it looked like an alien or that they had proof of it being an alien. NASA said "NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The caption noted a huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose,and mouth". NASA also gave proof that the shadows gave an illusion of the rock formation that it looked like a face.
Another way that it did not look like a face is that MOC said it was just a landform on Mars. MOC also said that the face was not and alien and revealed what it actually was. MOC said " MOC team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos...anxious web sufers were wating when the image first appeared on a JPL web site,revealing...a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all". MOC had proof and a picture that the face was not an alien and that it was something diffrent.
Finally, you can see that most of the scientist said it was a type of landform or something else. They never said that is was an alien. They all had proof and a picture to tell us that it was a natrual landform. The face is actually a Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa which is a type of landform. The face on Mars is not an alien at all. | 4 |
d926aa2 | The reduction or limited usage of cars impacts the daily lifes of society and also benefits the enviroment; It could also Change the way you see things.
Limiting the usage of cars can reduce the pollution in the air caused by cars and motorists.
Around the world people have a different way of thinking when it comes to cars, Society has come to realize that car usage is becoming dangerous & unnecessary. "It was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the day; to promote alternative transportion and reduce smog". In colombia People have decided to change the routine of driving everywhere in cars because it might be unnecessary since their destinations might be close; instead they reduced the transportation usage and only buses are permitted; it lowers the pollution in the air. This demostrates that a campaign of limiting the car usage should begin in other countries.
In Germany People have founded other ways to limit the car usage instead of banning cars. Society decided to make the streets more compact less far away from the community itself. "Make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation with, less space for parking, stores are placed a walk away on a main street" By doing this action; it takes pressure away for people who use their cars everyday to drive anywhere. It also saves people money by not spending on gas & most importantly it encourages people to walk and exercise by doing simple things like shopping. It also psychologicaly impacts community members. " When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way".
There's many others ways of influencing people to not use cars. For example, making a national fine. Like the goverment in France made " License plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine".
Driving less could have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the enviroment, It will allow people to feel more free and less stressed and it also allow them to meet new friends, their could health become better ; The economy could rise, traffic will be cut. There would also be less car accidents and crashes due to less traffic. | 4 |
d92b4de | Global warming is something that is very dangerous and something that no human should ask for. But by driving a car on a daily schedule thats basically what your doing. A car is one of the main causes of air pollution, and when humans use it so many times in a day it doesn't make that any better.
Their are many places that notice the increase in global warming so the country reduces the amount of car usage. According to Source 1 "70% of Vaubans families do not own cars." and "Passenger cars are responsible for 12% of greenhouse gas emissions in europe, and up to 50% in some car intensive areas in the United States." So the question is why isn't the United States doing something to stop the amont of air pollution in our country? Paris is another country thats doing something for this cause, Another source states "After days of near record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city."
Those are not the only two countries that are taking action for this cause. In Columbia they have a day called "Car-Free" and it is a program in which the only things allowed are hiking, biking, skating, or even busses or taxi's. The gol of the program is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. But this could have a negative impact on car companies like Ford and much more. Source 4 provides us with some information on that, it states "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23% betweent the years 2001 - 2009 In the US."
So fellow citizens dont you think its time to make the change and act upon it? Limiting the amount of usage of your car would also save time, conserve resources, lower emissions, and improve safety. So next time your driving in your car just remember that it could be hurting the environment. | 3 |
d9311a7 | How Can We Explore Venus?
Today many scientists are looking on how to get to Venus and study it, researchers have been trying to find a way but had always failed. Now they're still looking on what to do because the planet Venus is really facinating and amazing for them.
Why does until today scientists keep wanting to visiting Earth's twin (Venus)? Because the planet itself is incredible. And it says it in the text in paragraph 4 that "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in ouir solar system." The studies that they researchers have made so far is that " Long ago, the planet Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.
Based on the text we can see that the next planet's fascinating, according to the passage it is really hard to get just one foot on Venus, you won't even last a minute or more, we can see it's impossible to land on it. But that doesn't affect scientists. The writer said that "It's a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets..., and the temperatures average are over 800 degrees Farhenheit, the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." But it does not matter to them.
In the fourth paragraph the writer state that the planet has a surface of rocky sediment and " It includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Recall that Venus can sometims be our nearest option for a planetary visit." The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable for scientists,"but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?" That's the questions they're asking themselves until today.
NASA have been testing some electronics made of silicon carbide at higher temperature in a chamber, the same as Venus's, and it lasted for three weeks in those conditions, they're still believing in landing on Venus, because "human curiosity will lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." said the author. | 2 |
d9319e2 | What is your point of view on this argument that we are discussing today here in the Sunshine State? The Florida Senator should consider keeping the Electoral College voting system to choose our President because the founding fathers of the United States established this system. The popular vote is terrible because in some cases it might be teens or young people that don't know about poltics or what they want to give to this country or state. They vote on the things that interest them, not the country. When you vote for anything, your main pryority is "Does this make the country a better place and will bring more benefits to the people in this country or state"?
The Electoral College voting system is much easier to count who won because its a "winner-take-all" system. This can be seen when " The popular vote was very close in Florida [in 2012]; nevertheless Obama, who won that vote, got 29 electoral vote"(Source #3). This example shows even tho the popular was very close, Obama still won Florida and got those 29 electoral votes. There is a another way people view the Electoral College and they say that the "Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and irrational"(Source #2). They also say the best argument against the Electoral College is the disaster factor.
Each person has their own point of view about each thing but mine is that we should stay with the Electoral College system because it benefits the people in Florida and the United States.
For example, "In [2012's] election, for example, Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney. . . . Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state"(Source #3). This shows a certainty of the outcome for that state. This also cause candidates to not spend their time in states "they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states"(Source #2).
Therefore, we should consider keeping the Electral College for various reasons. The Electoral College has been the voting system of our country all along. Why should we change the tradition that our founding fathers left for us? Eveything in life happens for a reason, I would appeciate it if you could the the Electoral College in this beautiful Sunshine State, Florida. | 4 |
d93507a | Luke's point of view convincing people to participate in the seagoin. In the passage it states that you can make nine trips morethan the other seagoing cowboy. In the passage it also states that they had benfits of seeing Europe and China. This kind of proves how Luke's trying to convince.
Another reason that luke trying to convince you. In the passge it states that Luke torned an excavated castle in crete and marveled at the panama canal on his way to china. Another detail from the passage is that Katie farm as a boy had prepare Luke for hard work but not for the dangers at sea. This also can of proves how Luke trying to convince.
Luke's point of view is first person beacuse he talks about how he got into seagoing cowboys .In the passsage it states that he had bales of hay and bags of oats had to be pulled up from the lower holds of the ship. Next ,It states that a small strip of metal along the edge stopped his slide ,keep | 1 |
d93bf92 | From my point of view i thinmk driverless cars has its fualts and also has very good points. I am more for driverless cars because i think it will help out alot and make things safer. Such as people have habbits of texting and driving i think having a car that drives itself would allow them to send those texts ina much safer way.
I think this is a very cool and could be safe invention. Obviously i think they have some things they need to work on to make it safer and more reliable but i think in the long run this will work very well and be very reliable product. I would buy a driverless car if i had the chance because it is a very useful tool.
To finish this up I think this will be a very great thing to make and put on the market. i think it will bring alot of plesure and good things to those who buy it. I think it copuld go for alot of money and car dealerships would make alot of money off of it. It brings more saftey i thinkand would work well and really change the way people would drive from now on. | 2 |
d9429ff | Dear Senator,
I feel as if you should keep the Electoral College as it is. Our country is so messed up that we have a lot of our people not working or just getting well-fair. To be honest, that isnt fair that they get a vote. Who are they going to choose when it comes to voting? Someone trying to help us move forward or someone making our tax money got to the people who dont want to get off there lazy butt and do something. I do not know 100% of the facts on who can vote or not, but if a bum sitting on state road 70 all day begging for money just so he can go buy beer, seems unfair that he should even get a vote. In my opinion half of the population will end up voting for someone because, of what bad benefits he is offering and then we will be stuck with another bad president for another 4 years! Who knows more about congress then our congress? Lets be a honest here, do we really want all our tax money going to families with 8 kids and cant afford 2 or the bums on the side of the road begging for money or the trashy people hitting up crack ever time they get a little bit of money? Not me!
The article states that yes the electors may choose differently from what the people and the popularity wanted. I dont think that matters because why would they vote for someone who isnt fit to be president? If they are even up there, they are fit. So I think the Electoral College is just fine of a process to use for the United States of America. Yes, maybe our electors dont see certain benefits one canidate might be offering or doesnt understand as to why one might be better in your eyes. But in the end, the president we choose is probably not even going to actually do half the things he promised so who cares?
If we want this country to go anywere we need to let the people who actually understand what the men up on the campains telling the people of america a bunch of lies really offer us. They know whats good for us and thats why they are voting for them.
I hope you understand where I am coming from.
Thank You, PROPER_NAME | 2 |
d94f7e5 | The author did well on supporting the idea that studying Venus
is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers becasue there might be some new stuff that we havn't yet explored on Venus.
In the article it mentioned that Venus has still has some features that are similar to Earth, like valleys, mountains, and craters. " Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." ( paragraph 4) " The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters."( paragraph 4) The artical also mentioned that
Venus might acturally be a planet that us humans or other types of life forms could possibly be able to live on Venus because the temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to the sea level on earth. " Temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth." ( paragraph 5).
Scientist belives that long ago, Venus could have possibly contained oceans, which could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth does. Scientists are problably questioning on what happend to Venus oceans.
I know that if us humans were to go Venus without a spacesuit, we would problably get crushed becuse of the air pressure, just like the water pressure could crush a submarine, depending on how deep down you go into the oceans. If Venus had Earth-like features wouldn't that me that Venus once had air that us humans could breath, water that we could actually drink, etc. In the articel talked about how Venus
didn't have different kinds of light because the light couldn't penetrate through the dence asmosphere. Us humans and other types of life forms need sunlight to survive, So how could life possibly be found on Venus if there is hardly any type of
light coming through. The mystery behind Venus, has yet to be unsolved, but I feel like some day we will get to bottom of this mystery and when we do get to the bottom of this mystery, the mystery will be solved and all of our questions will be answered. Im hoping that some day we do solve this mystery. Venus could actually be another planet that us humans and other types of life form could live on, but until we solve this mystery, we're going to have to keep trying, don't give up, keep gathering new type of information and when we do gather some new information, we keeping closer and closer to solving this mystery. So lets just keep pushing forward and hopefully reach this goal. So lets just keep our heads up high and just hope for the best. If we all work together, we might actually solve this mystery. | 4 |
d9503fa | The article "Unmasking the Face of Mars" talks about a face formation on the planet Mars that people think was a creation made by aliens. Others think the the face is just formation that formed from natural events. Scientists say that the face is just a natural formation and others think that the face is acutally made by aliens. I think that the face on Mars is actually just a natural formation that occured making the face that is shown. Here is why I think that the face is made by natural events.
The face is actually like other buttes or mesas on Earth that are commonly found. According to the article, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or messa-landforms common around the American West." The face on mars is almost like areas found on Earth making the face seem like it is just a common thing that forms like a butte. Are the buttes or mesas on Earth made by aliens too if the face on Mars was made by aliens? No. The buttes or mesas on Earth are accually formed from natural aspects.
The face could have been formed because of the weather conditions on Mars. According to the article, "The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April '98-a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. The Camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face." The weather conditions on the Red Planet could have been bad on the day that the face was formed. The face could had just been naturally formed because of the weather phenomenon going on in Mars. The planet just could have had bad weather conditions during the time.
When Mars Glodal Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time in 1998, a picture was taken and a natural landformation revealed that there was no alien monument after all. According to the article, "And so on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mas Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, reavealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." That means that the face found on Mars wasn't actually an alien monument. Just a natural landform. When the monument was taken on a sharper picture, the alien monument was actually just a natural formation.
Now you might say that the face found on Mars is accually an alien monument. However, the monument wasn't actually made by aliens, it was made by natural events. According to the article, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West. `It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho,` says Garvi. `That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the ame height as the Face on Mar.`" There could have been a volcano that erupted and the lava from it could have hardened forming the face that is on Mars.
In conclusion, th Face on Mars is actually just a natural formation that occured making the face that is shown. The face isn't made from aliens. The face is just a regular formation that occured rom natural events. The face might have been made from aliens according to some people but in reality, the face is made from natural phenomenon. | 5 |
d95109e | A world without cars is kind of hard to imagine right? Well not for most countreis anymore. Cars are becoming less and less desirable as the years go on. The peak was in 2005 and then has been slowly decreasing. Younger people like the ideas of cars but don't really need one. New York has subways, taxi's, and others are carpooling to destinations. France has alreayd issued a ban on cars and has even had certain cars banned on certain days. For instance, even number car plates could not be used for driving on Monday's, odd number plates were banned for Tuesday's. This was to help reduce the amount of smog in the French air as they rely mostly on diesel rather than gas. In Vauban, Germany street parking, driveways and home garages have been banned from neighborhoods. You could now only buy a house with a garage for $40,000. This cause more people to stop using cars, and others to sell them to live in the upscale neighborhoods. Many of the Ford and Mercedes car dealerships are considering changing their train of car producing to the newer ideal of intertiwning public transportation with the up and coming ideas of bikers on the rodes, and people using buses and subways instead of their own cars.
In Paris the smog in the air was soon thicker than it was in Beijing, China the citied known for its polluted air. Soon Parisian officials enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the smog. Monday's, motorists with even-numbered plates had been ordered to leave their cars at home or get a 22-euro fine, which is also $31. The same requirements were set in place for odd-numbered plates the following day. The first time this new ban was enforced nearly 4,000 dirvers were fined. Some even had their cars impounded for thier reaction to the new fine. The amount of traffic was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after the five days of an intensifying smog. The smog was caused by cold nights and warm days that caused the warmer layer of air to trap the car emissions. Diesel fuel was, of course, blammed as France has a tax policy for diesel fuel over gassoline. 67 percent of vehicles in Frane, compared to the 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe. Paris would typically have more smog than the other European countries with the percentage of diesel fule they use daily. Paris had 147 micrograms of diesel per cubic meter last week compared to 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London. Delivery companies lost revenue, but this starte an exception for plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers. Soon the smog had cleared anouth on Monday for the ruling French party to take away the ban for odd-numbers plates on Tuesday.
The United States has long since been one of the world's prime car cultures. President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse has emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitious assist from a incipient shift in American behavior. | 2 |
d95518f | Today, it is not often we see somone walking or taking the bus as transportation. Cars are the more preferred option of getting from point A to point B in a quick an easy way. It is hard to even think about a world where car usage is limited, but there are many advantages of it and several efforts being made to accomplish this.
To begin, there has been a slow decrease of miles driven, driving by young people, and people obtaining a driver's license in the United States. President Obama has made it a goal to curb the country's greenhouse gas emissions, but how is this to be accomplished? As studies show, America might have already had its peak in driving. People are finding alternatives to the car such as public transportation, walking, bicycling, or carpooling. As for limiting the pollution, many sociologists believe if this decrease persists, it will benefit carbon emissions and the environment. Mimi Sheller, a sociology progessor at Drrexel University and director of its Mobilities Research and Policy Center, said: "different things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long-term cultural shift." Car companies have even began to worry and proposing ideas if this is to be accomplished and personal vehicle ownership is unnecessary. "Pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety," said Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company. He proposed partnering with telecommunications industry to create cities where this ideal would be a reality.
Moreover, there are several other reasons why limiting car usage is advantageous.
Recently in Paris, there has been near-record pollution and in response, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air. Congestion was down 60 percent but delivery companies complained of lost revenue. If Paris did happen to continue this ban, pollution would have decreased even more. Also, in Bogota, Columbia, there is a day each year dedicated to fray from car use with only buses and taxis permitted to drive. People hiked, biked, skated, or took public transportation which was the cause of the absense of traffic jams. The goal of this day is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza. Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asunción, Paraguay said, "these people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders." This will hopefully spread into other countries, occur on more occasions throughout the year, and lead the way to ridding the world of pollution.
Furthermore, a suburb in Germany has taken a more extreme approach to the car-free situation. 70 percent of the residents of Vauban, Germany have given up there cars. This is a growing trend in Europe and the United States and has become a movement known as "smart planning." larger cities full of families are to blame for the impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emmisions from tailpipes, says experts. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." This experiment is very advanced and proves that living without cars is possible and has many advantages. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, resident of Vauban. Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill to be approved this year, said David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America.
To conclude, I believe there are many advantages of limiting car usage. Pollution would decrease and traffic jams would stop. Although many efforts are being made such as the ban in Paris and Car-Free day in Bogota, Columbia, people seem to be leaning more towards other means of transportation other than the car. Both of these as well as the growing cities that forbid cars I think will lead the way into a world where personal vehicles are impractical and unwanted and pollution from cars is a thing in the past. | 3 |
d95597f | Do you ever wonder if there is life on Mars? Many believe there is, but it has not been proven. NASA have been searching for the answer for years. On the Viking spacecraft 1, they spotted a shadowy likeness face of a human on Cydonia that went on for nearly two miles. But, how did it get there? Many believe Aliens, but really the face is just a natual landfrom.
To beginning with, there is no physical evdience to back it up. Scientist believed it was just another Martian Mesa. There common around Cydonia, and coencidently this shawdow looked like an Egyptian Pharaoh. When NASA soon sent the photo out to the public, the caption wrote "huge rock fromation ... which reembles a human head." If NASA believed that it was just a rock formation from the start, then why would it be Aliens once the public seen it?
Secondly,
the image was simply just a illusion. Our minds are able to turn anything we look at into a face, as long as if the items are in correct positon. Have you ever looked at the front of a vehicle and thought it was smiling? That was simply just a illusion. When the huge rock formation was seen, it simply was our mind thinking it looked a face, but it really wasn't.
Lastly, the rumors of it being Aliens did not begin until the photo was realesed to public eye. If NASA did not believe it was aliens then why would we? In that time period, NASA had not found life on mars and still have not. There is no water to show signs of life. When the media saw the photos of course they immediately will say Aliens. NASA simply, wanted peoples attention to go to Mars for funding. On April 5, 1998, when the Mars Global Surveyor flew over ,and took a better picture it was soon realized it was just a natural landform.
There is no proof that Aliens created the face on Cydonia. It was just a natural landfrom. Until NASA is able to find proof that it is aliens on Mars that it will just be a natural landform. The Alien theory was proved wrong by Mars Global Surveyor. NASA had lots of logical deails on why not it was not Aliens.The Egyptian face was just a natural landform. | 4 |
d9597ce | In society today us humans often have trouble with reading another person's emotions, we tend to think the person is happy when they're truly mad. Prof. Thomas Huang, of the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science at the University of Illinois, has made a computer software with a feature able to scan one's face and present its facial expressions. Although this idea may seem like a technological breakthrough, think of the pros and the cons. The disadvantages out-weigh the benefits in this idea, thinking you know one's emotions because of a machine created by imperfect humans does not mean it is one hundred percent correct.
Computers will never be humans, they will never have the human qualities we have. Thomas says "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" (D'Alto 6). What if the student isnt really bored like the machine thinks? The machine will make a false adjustment that could do the complete opposite of what the kids wanted. Some deceitful kids could out-smart the machine and fake boredom all the time to make the machine adjust and change everything. Not only that, different kids won't have the same emotion. If half the class is bored and half is having fun, what will the machine do then?
Although Thomas thinks he knows every expression and how to get anyone's true expressions, he is mistaken. All humans have different shapes, sizes, colors, and abilities. This machine will never be able to guess true emotions. Humans express things in totally opposite ways. Altough Mona Lise looks happy in the picture, she could really be faking it. The only correct way to know one's true emotions is not by calculating percentages with a machine, its by expressing your feelings to one another. I can see what's going on in this world, we rely and dwell on technology. As a planet we really do not have enough good quality human interactions, so why improve communication between people and computers as thomas says. Humans are constantly competing and at war, adding this technology will just be giving humans excuses and false assumptions. We should start on using technology to improve human interactions instead of using technology to improve our human interactions.
Basing a decision off of an imperfect machine will get you nowhere but making false assumptions and incorrect decisions. Not everyone is the same, nor will they ever be. Expressing your true feelings through words is better than a machine thinking someone feels a certain way. Also, not everyone feels the same way and this machine will cause trouble if a person purposely changes a way they look. This idea will never work because us humans are not all nice people. Men and women need to work on communicating with other humans and not technology. Countries are at war and some people are worrying about creating technology to better computer and human communication. Differences, deception, irresponsibility and disrespectfulness amongst humans are why this idea of reading one's emotions will never work and will constantly make errors leading to a downfall in our society. | 4 |
d96a3ea | I know that it is a very debatable question, but the Face wasn't made by aliens but simply just a natural landform. If you don't believe me then I can give you a few facts that should justify my answer. And no, these are not just opinions they are indeed facts.
The first clue as to why the Face is just a natural landform is that in April 5, 1998 the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Mars with Micheal Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera. In line seven it states that after the photos were taken and posted online fore people to see, all the pictures revealed was a natural landform with no alien markings what so ever.
Another reason is that on April 8, 2001 NASA had once again sent their mars Global Surveyor up into space to get an even closer look at the face on account so many people didn't believe that it was just a natural landform. The camera that they used to take the pictures with made each pixel in the photos span from 1.56 meters, as said in line ten. Even after they had taken the photos again witha more advanced camera, the images only showed what resembled a butte or mesa, stated in line 12, and once again no evidence of alien markings.
Those are the two reasons as to why the Face is only a natural landform and not an alien monument. NASA has taken pictures of it two times already and even with a more uprgraded camera they still didn't find evidence that aliens ever created it. | 3 |
d96aded | So when Luke came back to China he saw even more homeless people than before. So he thought he would have to make a change to that.
So when he was setting up a program for conviencing people to help the homeless Don tried to call and have him come to America and and Luke said, "Don, I can't I have to help the people in China because I see little kids and grown people starving on the street and that hurts me." So then when he had it set up a lot of people came to support it and Luke convienced a lot of people, but also a lot of people not to help. So the applications to sign up there was a fee of ten dollars to help with the grocceries and that was why even more people did not join him.
So when he saw a lot of people without forms he stopped everybody and had a long speech about helping the poor and imagine if you were in their shoes and telling them they didn't want to be like that. So then almost all the people clapped and then walked in and got a form and asked him where to start. He said," Just if you see a homeless person, help him out. So then after he rode his boat to America and helped Don out he came back to China to see how his SeaGoing Cowboys program was going.
When he came to China he was very happy of how everybody had a house and job and nobody was starving. So he set up a meeting and thanked everybody who supported that program and told them they did a wonderful job and he almost cired of how much he was happy.
So when he rode his boat back to his home town he told Don and Luke's family about what happened and they said they should do that in America and they did and it worked out just as great as China. His program became national because how good it was and he said it was all the people who helped out he said, "What I love about it was that they didn't have to do but how they did, it just makes me warm inside and very happy." So just seeing homeless people on the street made and making a program had this much of a bennifit. Luke felted great about what he did. | 1 |
d96ddd6 | They're many advantages on limiting car usage in the world. Car usage brings a lot of pollution to an enviroment. This could even cause diseases or even cancer. Driving causes people to do less exercise/activties such as walking or jogging/running. But on the other hand there can be good advantages.
Without cars in the world people would be able to save the money that they would spend monthly in gas or repairments. Car owners have to buy a garage which is $40,000 along with the home. David Goldberg said that "How much you drive is as important as whether you have a hybrid". Ever since World War II all development has been centered on the car. Most car owners don't use other transportation expect for there car, for instense people who has to go to a destination that is 2 miles away don't use a bike or jog there, they use there car.
But on the other hand there some benefits on using a car. Such as getting to destination that is far like 20 miles, what is another way to get there without using cars, you can use public transportation, now lets say that there was no cars in the world and only public transportation than they have to make approximately 8 billion buses, trains, subways, airplanes, and taxi's. And there is still going to be around the same amount of pollution.
In conclusion, without cars there can an impact on the world. This would benefit businesses such as bike companies, shoe companies, and etc. It would be easy for people to get a custume without cars. | 3 |
d9738d3 | Driverless cars aren't really driverless and may even cause more problems on the road. One negative aspect is that eventually the ability to drive a car would wither away and die. For example, if you took a one year old baby and cooked for and fed him until he was eighteen, would he be able to cook? Even if he watched you cook, he can never cook how you cook because he was never taught the skill. It wasn't needed. So just like that, manual driving can be eradicated for generations to come. Eventually, would anyone know how to drive?
Driverless cars are a thing of the future, but are they really better for us? Not necessarily. Although, there are just as many good things as there are bad. If a driver is exhausted and wanted to relax after a long day at work, then the driverless car can drive him home and into his bed. But maybe driving the car was the only thing keeping him awake and alert. There are solutions to this problem, the article states, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." But does this eradicate any threats or problems of driving driveless cars? But they aren't all bad. There are just as many positive characteristics then there are negative. But I believe that many issues will arise in the future.
Of course, they aren't completely driverless, but I strongly believe that driverless cars are more trouble than they are worth. Well that's a lie, because they're actually worth a lot. This introduces my next topic, inflation, of sorts. Even if all of the good overcomes the bad, the money value would increase exponentially. You think cars are expensive now? With all of the new technology and saftey features the car is now 5 times more than its original price. Not to mention if something needs to be replaced, how long will it take to make the part? What are the repercussions of "fixed" car parts? How expensive is one car part going to cost? Maybe even more than the car itself.
Furthermore, if the driverless car does get into a wreck, who is at fault? The article also states that new laws will be enabled due to liability coverage. If the technology failed, or just malfunctioned, would it be the manufactor's fault, or the drivers? Moreover, this opens up multiple scam oppertunities. Car companies have been known to scam people for their wealth, this is cutting edge "scam material." Car companies can rig a car to make it seem like it's perfect, and make it malfunction later to blame the driver. This can cause the problems between multiple car companies and their consumers.
These are some of the more minor issues. Mechanical products are not perfect, they have equally as many flaws as humans do. This can result in the loss of lives, the initial poverty increase, and even the simple result of losing the ability to manually drive a car. These are minor problems to car companies, but to one individual, it can cause many, many problems. But there are good things about these smart cars as well.
Retrogress back to paragraph two when I stated, "There are just as many postive characteristics as there are negative." I reiterate, there are more bad things than good, but there are some very good aspects. Such as, being able to drive safely and do other stuff that wasn't appropriate while driving such as watching your kid, doing some paperwork, and even able to send a text message without endangering others around them. These are only some aspects, what about the ability to make traffic run exponentially fast and safe. That is a positive aspect for all. But previous problems have arisen and they are the "hallmark" for inefficient driverless cars.
Nonetheless, I believe that driverless cars are not as reliable as many might think. I also believe that the thought of leisure while driving somewhere is a spontaneous oppertunity. These aspects may change life as we know it. Add them all up and it's clear to see that these "smart cars" aren't so smart after all. | 6 |
d978161 | When were voting for president were not technically voting for the presient in fact we are voting for the slate of electors. The electors can be anyone without a public holding office. Electoral college process is not a good processs for presidency. While a president can get the majority of the popular vote; on the other hand, he could have the minority of the electoral college votes. That president would lose the elecetion even though he technicallly had the most votes. We should change the process into popular votes for the president.
The electoral college can or will defy the will of the people. The article "The indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong' ,by Bradford Plumer it quoted ,Back in 1960,segregationists in the Louisana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose Jhon F. Kennedy.(So that a popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy).The election whould have gone the other way if the due to the electoral college. The electoral college are way too risky to take on. just simply couple of unwilling electors can change the tide of the election.
The electoral college is a unfair process becausse of the winner-take-all system. In the article called What Is The Electoral College", by the office of the Federeal register it quoted most states have a winner-take-all system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate. In the other article "The indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong' ,by Bradford Plumer it quoted , candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the swing states. Electoral college is a unfair process because of the winner take it all. The winner takes it all system is a unfair process for the American citizens. even with a slightly change in the electoral college could change the tide or even cause a tie in the election.
In conclusion,The electoral college is a unfair process that has cause presidential election to change. The best results for electing president is by the popular vote. Obviously popular votes sounds more efficient and a clean election. The winner-takes it all process counterfits the number of american citizens voting result. Eletoral college process is an extra step to the election with more problems than barely any benefits. Electoral college should be change and alter in to a different process with clean votes that'll actually be fair for once. | 4 |
d97863b | The use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. The Facial Action Coding System can help the teacher, helps students bring a smile to their face, and helps people tell how other people are feeling. The technology will help a teacher understand how some students are feeling so the teacher can know what to do differently. It can put people in a better mood by just smiling. The technology can also help people see what kind of emotion other people are feeling.
The new technology called the Facial Action Coding System can help a teacher understand how their students are feeling. For example, if some students are bored, the teacher can try to do something more exciting. In paragraph 6 it states, "A classrom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." This shows that a teacher would know if a student is confused and could explain to a student more to help them. This new technology helps both students and teachers.
The technology can help students bring a smile to their face. By just smiling even if you're in a bad mood, can make you feel better. The text says, "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them."(paragraph 9) This means that moving your facial muscles can help you be in a better mood. It may help students smile more, which can make them feel better.
The Facial Coding System can help friends and family recognize each other feelings. Instead of wondering if someone is not in a good mood, the technology will tell you. In paragraph 5 it says, "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." This explains that you can tell how someone is feeling by the look on their face, but the technology will help you know how they're really feeling. This can help a person cheer someone up if their depressed or sad.
The new Facial Action Coding System will be valuable in a classroom to help read the emotional expressions of students. It will help teachers understand how students are feeling, put a smile on people faces, and help people recognize how other people are feeling. This new technology can help many different people. | 3 |
d979a6e | Can you see a driverless car in the future? Google is working on a project. A car that can drive on its own. No one will ever need to buy a car again. There would just be driverless taki's everywhere.
Right now in this time, Google made cars that can drive by its self. These cars has senssors. It can detect if theres an object behind it, infront of it, And on the sides. these cars can drive its self to any location, you would just have to put it in the gps. Google cars aren't truly driverless; the person in the car would have to do it is pull in and out. The longest distence a driverless car has driven was half a million miles without crashing.
Every automakers is trying to make the best of the best. Making a car that can do everything. A car that dosn't need no one to pull in or out. A car that takes half the fuel that any car would be taking in this present time. A car that can detect people when there inside the car. A car that can travel million's of miles without crashing or breaking down. The best car creation built in history.
Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problem ahead will be solved. Tesla has a project a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot for 90 percent of the time. Other automakers such as Mercedes-Benz, Audi, And nissan plan to have cars that can drive them self by 2020.
There will be so much automakers that will try to make a car thats driverless, but the car is going to end up being so expensive that no one will want to but it. Google is trying to make so many cars that can drive its self, park its self, pull out its self and pick anyone up by its self. Google wants to make so many of these cars, Because google dosn't want people to buy cars anymore. All the driverless google cars will be public-transport taxi system. The taxi's will offer far more flexibility than a bus. Google believes such cars would fundamentally change the world. | 2 |
d987eaf | While driverless cars do seem like a good idea, there are only a few things that I can think of that are bad about them. I feel that driverless cars are a good idea, and that the states or the majority of the states should be allowed to let the citizens have them. There are many differant reasons that I think driverless cars can be a good idea. I feel that they could help in many ways, and prove to be a good thing for many people.
One reason that I think driverless cars are a good idea is because there are some people who are blind and have appointments or jobs that they need to get to. With the help of a car that can fully drive itself people that are blind or have anyother thing wrong with them can get to places that they need to be without depending on another person to drive them around.
Another reason I think these cars would be a good idea is because if there is a person that wants to be wreckless when they drive, they will not be able to. With the car controlling where the person goes, if it is a fully driven by the computers, then they will not be able to do anything wreckless or cause any problems. Along with that there wouldnt be any problems with speeding or violating any laws while on the road. If a computer and a lot of sensors are controlling the car then the amount of problems on the road will decrease.
There are many problems that can be fixed because of fully self driving cars. With a few years and a lot more money we can have self driving cars. And with the help of many people working self driving cars we can make the roads not only safer, but we can also make more people with disabilities more free to do what they want. | 3 |
d991ec4 | Have you ever wanted to travel fun places like cross countries going to china or go to what ever country you wanted. Well there is a book about cowboys that cross crountries and lived there.
Luke wants you to join the cowboy travel I know that luke wants to have fun. Luke Bomberguer had no idea that his life would change soon after his high school graduation. I think you should follow the cowboys because he just experiance many new fun things. He got to travel all the way to Europe and China. Wouldn't you wnat to travel chase your dreams and have fun. Lukes friend ask him did he want to and luke said yes , if you have job and you want to take a break then go with the cowboy and see how much fun you have. In August 14 they recived to report to New Oreans. The cattle boat trips are unbelieveable said luke. A opportunnity for a small town boy luke said again he had the side benfit of seeing Europe and china.
I think you should do what ever you want. If you want to chase your dream you can do it. Hard work pays off luke did a 2 time part job. After that he got to go to many places and the most biggest is going to China and Europe. If you want it people you can do it. | 2 |
d9929eb | People should agree that the face on Mars was probably an accident. The face probably was not a face, it could have been another Martian mesa. A rock os some type could have hit it or a meteor could also. Next, NASA took pictures of it, and NASA was researching it and studying it, so they can get more information on it. After studying it, they took a picture of it, and they engaged the public with it.
People started to have debates about the picture and what it could have ment. "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence pof life on Mars." The others are trying to protect it so NASA could be a little bit safer. The picture did look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. NASA said it was a "huge rock information" because it is very similar to a human's face. Next, you cannot just asumed the planet was made from aliens because there is a human's face on it. You got to study the artifact before you can assume it is from aliens.
After that, you got to be able to back up your answer , and saying why it is not a face. "Thousands of anxious web sufers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL website, revealing a natural landform."
People can asume it is a human's face because it look likes it. Another thing is that there is human's face on it, can mean life on the planet, Mars. Also the rock or the artifact does have an Egyptian Pharoah, it could mean a human was at one point up there. It probably is possible to have civilization on Mars.
In conclusion, the artifact could have just been hit by a rock. People need to belive most things that are not really true. | 2 |
d9936bc | The advantages of limiting car usage are very simple. For one, the amount of polution would drop.
The amount of polution would drop mayorly because with everyone driving cars there would be more polution but if we change that make people not use cars at all the polution rate would drop. The passage states, "...Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe...and up to 50 percent... in the United States."
Limiting the amount of car usage would help by not causing smog clouds throughout cities. Paris, France in puting a ban on driving due to smog. If people drive there they would be fined of 22-euro thats like $31. Smog makes it hard to breathe because its like if you're breathing polution and thats not good for people. As source 2 states, "cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions." that means that the car emissions stay trapped here and cant get out so what happens the we breathe that in all that smog and polution goes into our lungs and such. | 2 |
d99d5b0 | The author support the idea of studying Venus is a wroth pursuit despite the dangers really because he explain the reason why it is danger. The author explain to us that what are the explorer doing to find out what is happening and how are they going to go down to Venus to study it.
In (paragraph 2) their is a differences in speed man that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other time to Venus. Because Venus is sometimes right around the coner in space terms humands have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world but no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours.
The author explain us that they are still trying to find away to go to Venus and study the planet. Then explores are sending spacecraft and find out when can't they land on Venus and testing a lot of spacecraft to find out what are they missing to make the spacecraft land on the Venus. | 2 |
d9a091f | HEY YOU!, you should join the seagoing cowboy program because. If you would like travelling mabe you hould go with here is why. Also if you like contestes and roff stuff you should go with. Also if you like horuses you should go with here is why.
You can see excavated castle in Crete and panama canal in on the way to china and acropolis in Greece. Also explorer Europe and China , gondola ride Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water. Also fed, gron, muck stales that the horses were in.
You can find fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. You can play baseball, volleyball games in empty holds where animals were. Also table-tennis tournamennts, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games to pass the time.
You can also help people because the war put them to rounes and the animals will help them live. Also saves people from dieing and starving. You need to be strong and kind and helpful. That is why you sould be a seagoing cowboy. | 2 |
d9a15bb | Electoral college is a unfar way to vote for a president becasue it make the government officals bias to the more popular states such as Flordia or Texas. I think that we should get rid of the electoral college because it make the smaller states feel left out compared to larger states. If the president was elected by the population not by the "Government" how would it change the way the U.S. worked today.
The text informs me that under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for the slate of electors who in turn elect the president. In my opinion I think that there should be more than 3 votes or 4 votes for a state to elect a president. If the United States went to a population voting system the elections would be more fair to people that live in the smaller states. The text also informs me that in 2000 the U.S. presidential race, Al Gore received more individual votes than George W. Bush nationwide, but Bush wont the election, receiving 271 electoral votes the Gore's 266. If the case of Gore losing the election a year later Bush went to war on Iraq.
If the United States went to a population voting system the percentage of votes would increase dramaticly to cause a honest election. If the election where to happen next election cycle I think that it would change the way the United States votes. People are fooled by the president when they say "I will lower taxes, Protect the environment, or Stop the wars we are in" I thnk that it's a trick for them to win the votes they need to win. If the population voted for the president i think that the United States would not be in debt.
The reason I think that the voting regulations is broken is that smaller states like Rhoad Island is a state that gets 3-10 votes and Claifonia gets 55 votes. If the only thing that make people happy is to be heard by the bigger people in life. If you where a 18 year old kid in a small state trying to make a new product that could help millions but your in that state that wont let you be heard by the rest of the country. | 3 |
d9a2d87 | We should keep the Electoral College for a number of reasons. While it is usually thought of as "out of place", it is the fairest method in voting for our President. The Electoral College, first of all, the outcome of the Electoral vote is less likely to cause a dispute than the popular vote. Second, avoids the problem of Run-Off Elections. Last, the Electoral College helps balence the political weight for large states (by population). We need the Electoral College so not create any problems.
The outcome of the Electoral College vote is less likely to cause a dispute than the popular vote. The number of elctoral votes a candidate gets usually exceeds his popular vote. For example, "Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent on the popular votes cast for him and Romney." Since most of the states have a "winner-take-all" system, its easier to determine which candidate gets the elctoral vote if there is a plurality in the state. A tie in the electoral vote is possible, but not very likely, even if the total is an even number. Voting based on the popular vote would just cause more problems than we would like to deal with.
Run-Off Elections are avoided because of the Electoral College. Run-Off elections are elections that are caused when neither candidate recieves a majority of the votes given. As the article states, "Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College (301 and 370 Electoral Votes)". The Electoral College clearly shows who wins without any complications that would create pressure for run-Off Elections. We are releived of this pressure because we have the Electoral College.
Finally, the Electoral College helps balence the weight that large states lose because of
I urge this country to continue with the Electoral College as it always has! There may be better methods out there, but the Electoral College is the best system we have right now. | 4 |
d9b142b | There are some advantages without having cars to drive as seen in a suburb in German. This car free suburb has band the use of cars it is illegal to drive a car if you live in the suburb. it is a car free place although if you by a car you have to buy a special spot in a garage and spend upwards up to 40,000 dollars for a spot. People actually move to this suburb for the relief of driving a car because of the stress that goes into everyday driving. This suburb is living "smart" they have developed a new way to live this suburb is fitted with stores so you can still get all your groceries, clouths, etc. Living here it would be easiest to puchase a bicycle in order to get around in a faster way outher then walking. Here in this suburb over 70 percent of Vaubans families dont not own cars and 57 percent sold a to move here.
The car freesubhurb has slowly grown and its still growing everyday IN Vauban there are over 5,500 residents who live there within a rectangular square mile. STores are placed a walk away on a mainstreet rather down a road on a highway. Although the area in small enough to walk through the advanteges for shopping is great your not far from home and you can still take a bicycle to get around. The exhuast level in the air has decreased dramaticly in this suburb more and more places want to start this new way of living but outher people may not like living so close to eachouther some people like there privacy out and away from outhers.
Paris has band driving due to all the smog produced by all the cars. In paris driving you will be fined almost 4,000 people were fined for driving there cars. If paris resorts to the "smart" way of living as in Vauban German the smog levels would decrease raoidly if they banned cars. Ome cities are even trying to band public transportation because of all the the smog. Thats a valad point if you were to band cars youd have to ban outher transportations like buses, cabs, etc. If the new style of living hits the united states my choice of transportation will be a horse just like the old days. | 3 |
d9b3f52 | Exploring another planet may be fun, but how would you like to live in a different planet? Venus is the second planet from the sun, but it's hard to study this mysterious planet because of the different risk that may be on the planet. Many people have tried to visit this planet but had no success. The reason of not accomplishing this goal is because of the many dangers that are within the planet. Although it may seem fun to go study another planet, some may consider it to be a major risk due to the fact that: It's a new planet with no knowlage of knowing what might happen, high or low tempretures, and challenges that may come to getting to know this planet.
Many scientist sent numerous spacecraft to Venus but unfortunetly none has maintaine to last the newly planet for more than a few hours. In the text it states, "Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus, ph.2). However, people may ask why vist this planet, we have other planets that are more closer. Well studies have shown that Venus is the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. In the text it states, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus, ph.4). So, the only difference of the Earth, and Venus is the tempreture they have.
In any planet, you don't happen to know the tempretures in the planet. Many plantes have high or low tempretures, and some may even have toxic air for us humans. In Venus the air is mostly made up of carbon dioxide and corrosive sulfuric acid. In the text it states, "97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus" and "Clouds of highly corrosive sulfic acid in Venus's atmosphere"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus, Ph.3). Wanting to go vistit another planet is meaning having to wear special gear so you dont get sick due to the different air it has from Earth. Furthermore, the text also states, "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus, Ph.3). Having high degrees is very dangerous for us humans, especially if we've never encountered this problem here on Earth.
Austrounots are very brave people, they do all these studies for us so we could understan how another planet functions. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) do send humans (Austrounots) to go study Venus, but they don't particuarly land on the planet. In the text it states, "NASA's possible solution to the hostlie condition on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus). This motion is leting the humans hover over the planet and it helps protect the people from any harmful ground conditions by not touching the planets surface.
In conclusion, it is fun to study another planet, yes it may seem harmful but in reality the NASA people do know what they are doing and yes they will watch over you and protect you. They | 3 |
d9c0590 | Recently we have discovered a new landform on Mars. Viking 1 caught a picture of a martian mesa, these are very common. These martian mesas are similar to the ones on Earth. They are very common in Cydonia, a region on Mars. Many conspiracy therorists are saying that it was constructed by aliens, but from the evidence we have, this is not true.
The picture taken by Viking 1 showed a large mesa-like landform with the face an Egyptian god on it. Everything can be explained in the picture. The landform is like any other one. The reason it looks like a face is because shadows were being cast onto it to make it appear like it had eyes, a mouth and a nose.
In 1998, a camera captured another picture of the formation. It was a little cloudy on the day they took the picture, so we went again to capture another picture. This time in April of 2001, we used a much better camera and used maximum resolution. This picture was much more detailed and clear. Once we zoomed in it looked like any other landform we might find. In paragraph 11 Garvin states, ¨So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks you could see them!¨ He was correct this picture proves that there is no alien activity near this landoform.
In conclusion, it is clear that the ¨Face on Mars¨ wasn´t created by aliens. We took a much more defined picture and found nothing. Not to metion the fact that there is no water on Mars, so it can´t support life. Very very few of the scientists beleive that this was created by aliens. Everything can be explained by science in this picture. | 3 |
d9c3ff1 | The Face from the article, "Unmasking the Face on Mars." was indeed not created by aliens. Evidence from the photos taken show that the Face was just a rock formation with no artifacts of life around it. The Face was also in an area for formations like that to be common.
The Face on Mars was not created by aliens because there is no proof in the pictures that were taken. Pictures were taken in the dates 1976, 1998, and 2001. In each of these three picutres taken there is so definate evidence that the formation was created by aliens. Instead, the pictures show that the formation is common and just happen to look like a face. The text states, "... Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
But not everyone was satisfied. The Face on Mars is located... a cloudy time of year on the Red Panet. the comera... had to peer through wispu couds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." Based on the information from the text, i can see why people could still believe that the Face was created by aliens. The text goes on to say, "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." this statement from the text verifies that any dicrempancies that were argued about earlier, were now out of the argument. Image was to clear to argue about anything. What was seen in the photo was very clear and there were no signs of alien trace.
The Face was in an area that was common for formations like it to be found in. The author states, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or messa- landforms common around the American West. 'It reminds me most of Middle BUtte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho,' says Garvin. 'That's a lava some that takes the form of an isolated mesa avout the same height os the Face on Mars." Therefore, this gives more evidence on how the Face on Mars was not created by aliens and was a normal formation.
The Face on Mars was a normal formation based on factual ecvidence from scientist. Pictures show that there is no sign of aliens on mars. If there were aliens, the picture would have shown eviidence concluding that the formation was created by aliens. Secondly, the formation was in an area that was common for buttes or mesas. For the reason listed above, the Face on Mars was not created by aliens, however: the Face was a natural landfrom just like we have here on Earth. | 5 |
d9c42c4 | Earth got a twin? yes Earth does have a twin called Venus. Venus is a place where you wouldn't want to be living right now. In fact, they could be dangerous in many ways. venus was a place to live before according to the autuhor they said "long ago,Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various form of life" basically what the author is trying to say is that as earth we have water and have life and so did venus but later on that had changed.
Venus can be dangerous in many ways. some of the ways are that Venus is so hot that the tempeture is about to 800 degrees fahrenheit and the pressure is about 90 times worse than what earth has. on the article the author said "temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenhiet, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experince on our own planet". this quotes tells me how hot it is and how bad it will be if we end up living in venus.
also even though mercury is closer to the sun, Venus is still hotter than any other planet. The author said
"Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though mercury is closer to our sun" basically what the author is trying tp say is Mercury is not hotter than Venus even though its closer to the sun.
Another important point is that Venus has a bad weather. according to the author they said "Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface" basically what this is trying to say is they have more bad weather than what Earth does. when youre on earth you barely get any earthquakes or lighning strikes, we do get them but it is not as bad as if it was on Venus.
In conclusion, i think we shouldn't really mess with venus because even if we try to find a way to live on there it woudnt work. if we were to live in venus everyone will die of heat,hunger because if the heat is way to hot than there will be no vegtables, fruits or animals. and if there isnt none of that than we wont eat and we will die. why bother some place where there no living and we will end up dying. but they could investigate more about venus. | 3 |
d9c628d | In the article "Making Mons Lisa Smile," the author describes how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enable computers to identify human emotions. I disagee about using of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable.
Technology, such as phones, laptops, or any devices, is not always true. They can predict about how people feel or their emtions. For example, in the second paragraph in the first sentence, it says, "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face".
Every people have different types of emotions. It's true that they have different kinds of emotions but what if it is fake? Computers are like robots. Computers can't prefer if someone is smiling or upset. Computers don't understand if someone is really smiling for real or faking smiling. It depends on someone's face. For instance, when a friend talk something fun, I smile but when a friend talk something boring, I smile too so they can be happy.
Is putting on a happy face actually work? I prefer not because it depends on someone's emotions inside instead of the outside. Not everybody can read someone's mind. In the last paragraph in the second sentence, it says, "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotions, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them".
It can be true, but it can be false. People don't know what is going to happen next. So people have to figure out on their own. So I disagree that about using of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. | 2 |
d9c8d70 | The article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" talks about new software created by Thomas Huag, who studies Advanced Science at the University of Amsterdam along side his colleague Dr. Huang. They are both experts at coming up with better ways for humans and computers to communicate. That is excatly what this new invention is about. The invention they created is used to help recognize not only humans emotions but paintings' emotions as well. Leonardo da Vinci's famous painting the "Mona Lisa"
is the subject of this particular experiment. Both scientists were succesful in finding out what were her actual feelings behind her smile. This invention would also be valuable for students in a classroom.
The author writes in the six paragraph "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored". The author continues to elaborate and says that then the lesson would be modified. Modifying the lesson can mean that the teacher changes their teaching plan to fit the students understanding. Having this new innovation will make students smarter and get higher test grades, because they will be learning at their own pace and level, thus helping them understand the work better.
This invention could also be essential for everyday human interactions as well since most of us communicate through a nonverbal launguage, this inventions would help us humans eachother better. Better communication leads to a lot of positivity in the world such as, less wars because we would be getting along better and understandandng eachother better.
Overall this new invention would be very essential to use in a classroom for many reasons. It helps students understand the lesson more. Understanding is key for better test grades. | 3 |
d9cb2a4 | The new technology that can describe how you are feeling from just ypur face is called, The Facial Action Coding system can be usefull in some positive ways or negitive,like it says in the articel you can read you classroom mines and you will know how they feel. In my opinion i think that they should use The Facial action coding system because you never know what someone is hidding or what they thing about the lesson in class or the work in a job. Also most of us will probably know how someone is feeling but some of us will not and that is were the Facial Action Coding system kickes in.
The most important thing about his machine is that there has been people that committed suicede and if the machine can detect what you feel i think that it can detect those people or kids and that way thier parents or teachers could know and stop it from happening and that machine can save a life or two. The machine can be also be used for police officers that need to slove a case or thing that someone is lying so they will just have to put the machine in thier face and ask questions and that will beb a win for th epolice officers. The article also said that the drawing of Mona Lisa was not only smilling she was also, ''9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, 83 percent happy and 2 percent angry''. So if that machine told them all those percents in just a smile that the painting did that is amazing.
The best way to put this is that anything is posiblie you just have to do it, Because in the article it says ''Moving you facial muscles not only expresses emotions but also may even help prduce them put on a happy face. I alsways thought that mona lisa was just happy in a picture but never in my mind did i thing that she was much more than just happy. The best is yet to come and we will not be worried about the stuff that happens becasue of their emotions because the Facial Action Coding System will get us covered.
So i ask you Did making a happy face in this experiment also make you feel slightly happy. | 2 |
d9cb4a4 | Driverless cars are an exciting look into the future of technology. They will make transportation easier and help the enviroment with less fuel use. Google cofounder, Sergey Brin, stated that, "The cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus". With more organizations like Google and General Motors creating technology for driverless cars they will become safer and be used everywhere.
Safety is a big concern with driverless cars but the safety is becoming a reality with these machines. The article says, "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash" which shows that the self driving cars are becoming safe and efficent. Many states are worried if a driverless car will keep drivers, passengers, and pedestrains safe. The driver will always remain in the car and will be able to take control if anything does go wrong so cars will remain as safe as they were before. Once the techonolgy is more advanced and manufacturers are ready to release a driverless cars the safety features will be able to keep all road users safe. While safety is a big concern of lawmakers and all individuals, the technology of these cars will be able to keeps everyone safe and worry free.
The cars being developed today are not completly able to run on their own and require a human to remain at the wheel and ready to take control. The self-driving cars can do many things on their own. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake thenselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills". Driverless cars will make it easier for users but it is a necessity for the driver to make sure they can take over when needed. This need for the driver to be ready will continue to decrease as the technology increases. Different features in the cars make sure the driver is alerted to take over. These features include a vibrating seat, flashing lights, sensors in the sterring wheel, and other "heads-up displays". The driverless cars are constantly improving but for now the driver will have to stay engaged in the road, which is good thing for the safety of these machines. The technology in these machines could make it possible for handicapped people to drive. A solidier who lost a leg or a blind person could transport themselves with the benefit of a driverless cars.
Driverless cars present new posibilites with the technology and the ease of transportation. Safety is a large issue with the car driving instead of the human but the advanced technology will make that problem obsolete. Self-driving cars are an exciting new posibility that will make this world a better place with easier transportation. | 4 |
d9cb9cc | The Facial Action Coding System enables computer to identify human emotions in the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile" it is shown that this high tech software can recognize how you are feeling for example if you smile a scanner will send the data to the computer and the main thing that the computer has to know is the mucles you are using because you could actually be mad,sad,disgust,fear,and surprise all at once so this high tech computer sees if you are using zygomatic major then you are smiling but if the person is frowning then that means that they are sad.
The Mona Lisa one of the most known peice of art from the Renaissance area made by Leonardo Da Vinci's is said to be the only painting at that time that seems to be a woman smiing but that is false. The Mona Lisa was actually showing more then just a smile she was showing three more different emotion besides happyness. The reason that is because when they took a picture of her and put her face in 3D humans face it showed that she was disgusted,fearful,and angry. So this computer can be also useful to see what people from the past felt during those time to see if they had any emotions or did they not. In my conclusion emotion can be easy to find threw high tech software but we as human can see the person emotions to but the only differents is that we see the main picture and not the littlest one's. | 1 |
d9cbe7f | Luke who was just a regular person in the world but during world war ll lukes life changed. His friend conviced him to being a "Seagoing Cowboy" And when Luke took the invite and he knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime.
It was 1945, World War ll was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins. To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United States Relief and Rehabilitation Administration). UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the hores,young cows,and mules that were shipped overseas. Luke and Don signed up.
They received their orders to report to New Orleans. "We arrived August 14, " Luke says, " the day the Pacific war ended. " With a cargo of 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them.
Luke turned 18 before arriving in Greece, which meant he could be drafted for military service. "When my draft board learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing that for my service. " By the time he was discharged in 1947, Luke had made nine trips_ the most of any Seagoing Cowboy.
"The cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy, " he says. "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis | 1 |
d9cc4d7 | We as people make assumptions every day all day. I read in an article that new technology is being created to read the facial exspressions on a person and determine the way a a person might be feeling. This technology is called the Facial Coding System. I believe the Facial Coding System would be valuable to students in a classroom or anywhere else for that matter.
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile.", The reader is being told that with this new software scientist can now "caculate" emotions. Dr. Paul Eckman is the creator of the Facial Aaction Coding System and he has classified happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, and sadness as the six basic emotions. Manypeople would ask how can a computer see or feel those six basic exspressions? Well, according to the text Dr. Huang stated,"The facial expressions for each emotion are universal". They used video imagery recognize a real face and even the painting of mona lisa. There are more steps that go into the Facial Action Coding System.
After the different units are weighed out the software will identify mixed emotions. According to paragraph four," Each expression is compared against aa neutral face (showing no emotion)". In order for the third step to work it has to be compared to a non-facial exspression. We as humans do the same type of steps when making an assumption. Think about the way we can tell if our friend or family member is feeling. Nomatter if they are sad, mad, happy, or glad we usually can see or feel how they feel.
We can tell how they feel based off of the facial expression they chose to give. According to the text Dr. Huangs new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code. This means that the computer code uses algorthms to figure out the facial expression just like artists do when they paint facial muscles to give off a specific emotion in a painting. Computers have rules or instructions to follow in order to complete something. Its called encoding. Encoding is not jst used for computers but, it s also used by us as humans. We tell ourselves how to feel, walk, talk, act, and many other things. Our brain sends out instructions to our entire body just like the motherboard does for a computer.
In conclusion the
Facial Coding System would be valuable to students in a classroom or anywhere else for that matter. We already have a system we use everyday as people to see how other people feel. Knowing how somebody feels can help us help them. If we could have the knowledge of definetly knowing how a person felt scientifically it would realy help us help them in understanding the trials and tribulations they might be going through. | 3 |
d9d0ecc | Dear State Senator,
I think that the Electoral College should be disposed of and the president should be elected through citizens' votes. I think this because Congress is biased. They don't have the same ideas as the citizens and can sometimes be difficult. It could be hard to compile the votes from the citizens and the votes from Congress because Congress could have a completely different view on the candidates than the citizens because they work for the government. I think it would be easier to just count up the citizens' votes and majority wins. Apparently Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agree with me.
How it works is they add up all the citizens' votes and say who has the most, then add up Congress's votes and tell the winner. What happens sometimes is there is a winner of the citizens' votes, so who the citizens think should be the new president, then they add Congress's votes up and the president is the other person, not who the citizens want the president to be. How is that fair to the citizens? That would be a big problem because then they wouldn't like their president, there would be rebels, etc. It would not be pretty.
For instance, in Texas, if you wanted to vote for one person, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors that would be pledged to that person. If the electors won the statewide election, they would go to congress and that person would get 34 electoral votes, but who are the electors? The citizens have no idea. They don't know who picks the electors or who the electors are, it depends on the state. The voters can't always control who their electors vote for. It's not their decision.
I don't think that is fair to the citizens. | 3 |
d9d132a | Driverless cars are a good idea and alot of people will benefit from them. There is one problem though, does this give the people the idea of I can just sit back relax and not pay attention. The car will do everything for me. NO! You still have to know how to function the car and watch out for other cars.
Like what the article said sensors are nothing new and have been around since the 1980's. The technolgy has always been there for example movie players, cameras, GPS. The car companies have probably thought of the idea of hands free driving for a long time. No company had the nerves to do it because they were afraid of some not paying attention and lets say the driveless system stops working and your on your phone and get in a bad car crash. The company would then get sued. The technology has gotten so good these days they are ready to start making these next generation cars. They did put in that the car will watch out for you and go the right speed and take you where you want to but you wil still have to do some little things. The article states "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify teh driver when the road ahead requires human skills." After reading that I would feel pretty confident about getting behind a wheel and letting the car drive for me. I have to admitt that would be pretty cool. I would like to see more people start using them. For istince I have never see one of these cars and I would give it some time for other people to use them just to make sure they are totally safe and I could put my family in one.
The car industry definantly has a bright future ahead of them with all these newer envented cars coming out. Especially this year Tesla is the guinne piq of them all so if things don't go right the other companies can correct the mistake on their own car. It would be cool to drive one in a town or city but I don't know how it would to being on a highway with some driveless people and some actual drivers. It would be hard because if you hit someone in a driverless car is it your fault or do you get mad at the car companie. I think things could really turn into a mess. | 3 |
d9d166b | The article I read had very insightful information. It showed both positive and negative effects to driverless cars. With that being said, I have decided to go against completely driverless cars.
To be clear, I am not against cars that help humans with driving, but I am against cars that drive themselves without any human skills. Cars have made a lot of technological improvements over the years, but I don't think that cars will be driving themselves completely for a while. Although technology has advanced extremely in cars considering that they can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, they also require human skills and intuition to help drive them. I also don't think that driverless cars will be cheap enough to supply the worlds growing population. Are driverless cars really necessary in cities like New York or San Fransisco? Where most of the cities population takes the subway or other forms of public transportation. Finally, there is the law aspect. The article mentioned who or what would be at fault if there was an accident, but what if a driverless car ran a car driven by a human off of a cliff. Would the person that was ran off the road be at fault? The driverless car is a computer and some people think that therefore it is never wrong about it's decisions, that the car would perfectly weight out the situation and make a decision based on which driver had a better opportunity to live.
The idea of a world with driverless cars seems great, but I don't think the world we live in is ready for it. I am not against computers and softwares helping humans with driving cars, but at this time I am against cars completely driving themselves. Technologically, economically, and lawfully I don't think driverless cars will be around for another thirty to fifty years. | 3 |
d9d5eaf | In the story A Cowboy Who Rodethe Waves was a seagoing cowboy and he had helped people form world war 2 and that would of been the reason why I would join there program becuse they had helped people and he had also went across the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and the Pacific Ocean twice.
The details from the article to support Luke's claims is in paragraph 4 Luke turned 18 before arriving in Greece, which meant he could be drafted for military service. By the time he was discharged in 1947, Luke had made nine trips- the most of any seagoing cowboy.
It took about two weeks for Luke to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China. They had helped the people by helping time feed there animals.
Then something bad happened Luke was talking about his report on a rainy night and then fell off a ladder and he couldn't work for a couple days becuse he had cracked his ribs. | 1 |
d9d981c | Driverless Cars
As we all know the future up head is very bright to this generation, we have major changes coming and they have positive affects and also negative. Today I'm on the positive side of this idea just becuase young people could really benifit from the driverless car. Teens 17 and up would prevent from many wrecks because of the driverless google car.
Why do I go with the positive side of this arguement ? It's becuase I want a safer enviroment and less wreckless driving on our streets. Manufactures are doijng all they can to build a safer car for these senerios and we need to admire the job they are doing no matter the outcome may be. For the better of driverless cars putting sensors into the car so that it could warn you of upcoming conditions on the road is a better way of staying safe and letting you know ahead of time.
Would you think it's better that the computerized car could drive, brake, and steer for you ? Even if the human is driving the car under his/ her own power we all need a brake at some point , the driverless car could come into place but you must stay alert to the road at all times for if the car warns you about the upcoming conditions on the road. Not everyone is going to like the driverless car becuase they like to drive themselves and that's most definitley understandable, but to the people that think this would better the world and future you could be going onto the right path.
You and me both know as the improvment of cars awaits us we would have to set laws for the newcoming of this situation. They want driving to become safe and we all do as well. Keeping drivers , passengers, and pedestrians safe all in one would lead to less deaths from motor vehicles. The next step in getting closer to improving the driverless car is very close and we should be happy about a new change with cars.
Now you think about the importance of driverless cars in the future ! Can you handle this ? Yeah the future is bright for us all and we can prepare what we know is a huge possible change. Due to upgrade technology scientist and inventors have the creativity and knowledge to put something terrific together called driverless cars that google has improved over the years and looking to better them even more this is why I have the positive side of the arguement. Driverless cars would better us and everyone all over the world that gets tired of driving or needs to text or do anything important at the time being in the car. | 3 |
d9e6a88 | Is the face on Mars the face of a new discovery in our universe? When a face was discovered on Mars, the idea of it was quite controversial. Generally speaking, the face on Mars was just a pop icon, not a sign of life. The face on Mars was proven to be a simple landform because NASA had photographed it from several angles showing all there was needed to determine, there were no signs of any civilization, and the environment was suitable to form buttes or mesas. The Face on Mars was just a pop icon and a skeptic's thought, not a sign of martian life or civilization.
First of all, in 1998 when the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia to find evidence, when all they found was a natural landform.
The Red Planet was very cloudy that time of year, and theorists believed that the haze was hiding any martian evidence or civilization. However, it is not easy to target Cydonia, because of Mars' natural orbit and the fog and haze Mars receives every so often. So, in 2001, NASA sent the Surveyor back up to Mars to take pictures and investigate.
When the photos were taken, the photos were discerned three times bigger than the pixel size, and no signs of civilization appeared. "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" Jim Garvin, the chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program states. Each pixel in the image taken was around 2 meters, when the Viking image taken in 1976 had fourty-three meters per pixel. In 1976, the theories could have been believable, considering that the images taken did not show very much evidence if any.
Finally, the American West was compared to Mars when the "Face" was labeled as a butte or a mesa. The American West is sultry, gusty, and somewhat similar to what the environment on Mars is. This environment is the perfect environment to form buttes, due to erosion in the soil and the wind pushing the soil around. The landmass on Mars is not exactly a butte, however. This landmass is the Martian equivalent to what the American West has. "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars," says Garvin.
"There hasn't been enough evidence of the Face on Mars to prove it's only a landmass!" There has been several images taken of the Face to prove it is a formation. However, the image taken in 2001 is the most accurate, considering that the pixels are about two meters by two meters. That is about 22 times more accurate than the picture taken in 1976, showing about fourty-three meters each pixel of Cydonia. If there were any evidence to show up on the Face, it would be shown in the 2001 image.
The Face on Mars is only a martian mesa, not a pop icon or a civilization. It is an extraterrestrial butte because NASA had photographed it from several angles showing all there was needed to prove, there were no signs of any civilization when images were taken, and the environment was suitable to form buttes or mesas. All in all, the Face on Mars wasn't a sign of out-of-this-world autotrophs, but it was just a simple bizarre-shaped butte. The Face on Mars was not only a controversy, but a resolved conflict between conspirors and Cydonia-scholars. | 5 |
d9e7c10 | The use of this technology to read students emotional expressions is not very valuble. No one can read emotions like teachers and peers can. If a student is confused or needs help they can simply ask for it, theres no need for a computer to tell what they need help with.
When some people are working on assignments on they often use trial and error and sometimes they just need to think about the problem before they do it. This could get confusing for the computer because when your thinking you often will look confused or you might be confused but later figure it out. You shouldnt have to rely on a computer to tell how your feeling to get help. Dr. Huang said "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored... Then it could modify the lesson, Like an effective human instructor." This ay sound like a good idea but if a student is getting bored they dont need there lesson modified to help them and most kids are going to be bored during school thats just how the majority of students are.
One thing that would be extremly hard to control would be when kids make weird or strange faces. How will a computer distinguish between an emotion due to the lesson and emotion due to something else. Like when a student is talkling to there friend and they laugh or smile. A student could also try to look bored or confused on purpose just to get out of doing certain work. Another big issue is the fact that not every students facial features are the same. One students face could look way different from the faces that the software the computer was built to recognize.
The last reason as to why this wont be a very popular tool in classrooms is because most school computers dont have cameras and wont be able to afford them or the software needed to run the programe. Of course they could get special fuding for the equipment but theres way better things that money could go towards to help the students excel in more ways then on a computer.
Its a very interesting idea but theres just way to many issues involved with it that wont allow it to takwe off like they invision. Its also just not anything that holds much value to schools If a student needs help they ask a computer cant tell what student needs better than a teacher can. It could be used for private use or maybe for something else but not in the education field. | 3 |
d9eba6d | We use them everyday, they get us to our destinations, but what would life be without them? What benefits could arise from limiting the usage of cars? According to source 1, "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars," source 2, "Paris bans driving due to smog," source 3, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota," and source 4, "The End of Car Culture," limiting the usage of cars has gained advantages towards traffic, pollution, and the overall community to better benefit the environment.
In source 1, "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars," residents of the "upscale community" of Vauban, Germany, have become "suburban pioneers" and "have given up their cars." Although in many cities around the world it is unimaginable to give up your cars, it has become increasingly beneficial towards the environment and community. It is said to be "a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes," as cars are responsible for "12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." Planners are now taking the concept to "suburbs" where "stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highways," thus making the car-banning residential friendly, and environmentally helpful. Not only will the limiting usage of cars be beneficial towards the community, it will also be beneficial towards your mental health as said by Heidrun Walter who stated "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way."
In source 2, "Paris bans driving due to smog," residents of Paris are also seeing increasing advantages "after days of near-record pollution" when Paris "enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." within "five-days of intensifying smog," "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France." If five-days can have a significant beneficial impact, imagine what a month can do, or a year, or even a decade towards the restoration of the environment.
Similar to the previous cities in the sources mentioned, Bogota also participates in a "car-free day" as stated in source 3, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota," where "millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work," "leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams." In this "Day Without Cars" campaign, "the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog," and its goal is being reached. By banning the usage of cars "it's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaze. Along with many other advantages such as the "blooming" of "parks and sports centers" "throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up," as stated in the article.
Last but not least, in source 4, "The End of Car Culture," "recent studies" have shown that "Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by," and "if this pattern persists... it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment." With a decreasing amount of citizens driving, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, has "led out a buisness plan" that will "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 improve safety." The decreased usage of cars will have an everlasting positive impact on the environment.
In conclusion, although living in a world free of cars is a world many of us can never dream of, it has shown to lead to significant advantages towards traffic, pollution, and the overall community, which can be seen in the cities; Vauban, Germany, Paris, France, Bogota, Columbia and the United States -- as stated in the sources "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars," "Paris bans driving due to smog," "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota," and "The End of Car Culture." Many of us should no longer dread the banning of cars, but anticipate it. | 3 |
d9f36b2 | So the face on mars. Many poeple say the face is a alien landmark. Well I dont. Im gonna explain to you why the it isnt. Also that it is just a natural made landform.
What the picture actually shows is the martian equivalnet of a butte or mesa- landforms common around the American west. " It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the snake river plain of idaho," say Garvin. "that's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the face on mars.
So on april 5, 1998, when Mars Globsl Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars oebiter camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a jpl web site, revealing... an natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
A few days later NASA unvield the image for all to see. the caption noted a " huge rock formation... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth" This is a great explanation for the way the face looks.
So there you have it. I say that the face is just a natural made landform. There is no evidence to show other wise. With the better camera we were able to find out that its not an alien atrifact. So yes it is not a alien atrifact. | 2 |
d9f4644 | The technology that is being used to show what you are actully feeling in the picture is not a such bad idea but it's also not something everyone would like to use. Many people might just not want to let know what is behind that "Fake Smile" people just dont really want theire own expression to hurt other peoples feelings. This is the way i can think one one example, say you take a picture with a celebrity thats maybe tired or realy mad but still has to take a photot with you and make a fake smile. You wouldnt even know until you get home and check on the image to see whats behind that act and whats behind the image,thats wheb you get upset and find out about the trusth because maybe its the not the moment that you wanted to capture in for that photot with a person you admire. Another example, we now know or think we know what Lisa was feeling behind that image but nobody will eventually end up knowing the actual truth behind that. Anatomy is a great thing to know about because you are learning nealry evey single thing about the body such as the mucles and the organs and all the small things nody would have even known of before. Eventually technology could get so better as these generations change, people now know better ways of acting and making themselfs feel a way they might not want to feel but yet can lie to others. Not all cameras on a computer might be able to detect much from a face. What would be the point of doing all this research and finding ways to know whats behind an image. What are people now doing about the photo now that they "Know" what Mona Lisa was feeling. Will ther be changes and speeches about what behind photos now? We also have to think about what other benefits could be pulled out from doing all of this new technology.
If I were to onehundred percent agree to this then i would say that it would be amazing, to figure out what aperson is feeling because maybe you want to find out the truth about something for a serious work case. I just think that there are two ways someone could go in with this. So i would say that its a good thing and a bad thing for this new technology to come to an end or to a better start. | 3 |
d9f6fd6 | Using this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. Sometimes students wont ask for help because they don't want people to think they are dumb. There also is just to many students for a teacher to notice when a student does not understand something or is bored. Therefore having this technology in classrooms would be good and helpful for the teachers and students.
Students alot of times wont ask for help, but with this technology teachers will be able to know when a student does not understand the lesson. It says in the article that " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," this would be helpful so when a student is bored or confused the teacher can help the sudent. "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," this technology could help teachers help there students. Alot of times people do not say how their feeling and wont say that they do not understand, so they just struggle with this technology that wont have to happen anymore.
When someone is upset, angery, confused, bored, or sad this technology can read their emotions and facial expressions. This would really improve teaching because it can tell when someone does not understand the lesson. It would help alot in classrooms. This technology would be very valuable in classrooms. | 3 |
d9fce09 | In recent years car ownership has decreased with positive consequences. Life with out cars has its advantages. It is reducing the amount of emissions put into the air, cars are resposible for 12 percent of green house gas. Life without cars can also relive stress.
An experimental car free community in Germany called "Vauban" completed in 2006 is a town where 70% of its residents do not own cars and the streets are completely car free. It's constructed so everything is within walking distance. This means no need for cars, wich means little to no polution. People usaully bike or walk to their destination in Vauban."when I had a car I was always tense. I'm much better this way" says a Vauban resident. Vauban is a component of a movment called smart planning. As you can see, a community with no cars is prospering aurgurably better than one with cars. People are less stressed and pollution is heavily reduced. A life/community with no cars has little to no negative results.
"After a near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air oof the global city." france need a solution to reduce the smog, so they banned even-numberd license plates on monday and odd on tuesday. with some exceptions such as electric cars and hybrids. After five days of heavy smog and no cars, smog congestion was reduced to 60 percent. Here is another perfect example how decreasing cars on the street is directly linked to pollution decrease .because they took away cars, pollution was heavily decreased. This is a huge advantage that limiting car usage has.
The USA has always been a car culture, but things are changing for the better.
car liscense ownership rates have only decreased since 2005. this means we are putting out less emissions than 12 years ago! we are eqaul to where the country was in 1995. the reasons vary as to why lisence ownsership is decreasing but so far it has its advantages. People are car pooling more and using bikes and walking to their destination. the only negative side of limited car usauge is for the car industry. with less cars on the road, they get less money. But overall people will benifit from this.
Limiting car usage has huge advantages and I encourage you to try walking or biking rather than using your car. You will become more socail, fit, and help prevent pollution. | 3 |
d9fd23e | Cars may actually disappear from the modern world humans live in. Cars sales are decreasing, and fewer cars actually are a benefit by making the air cleaner and making traffic and travel time faster.
Pollution is one issue that people have been trying to limit for years now. One way people can reduce emissions is to stop using their car. According to
Source 2:
Paris bans driving due to smog by Robert Duffer , pollution in Paris drastically decreased after driving bans were implemented. The ban on driving cleared up enough smog, that the French government was able to rescind the ban. Across the globe, transportation is America's second largest source of emissions and pollution as explained in
Source 4:
The End of Car Culture by Elisabeth Rosenthal . Rosenthal explains how that the decreasing number of cars on the roads in America will help the environment and decrease carbon emissions. Car emissions may be the largest form of pollution in America, but the percentage in American cities where most people are found has a drastically higher amount of emissions. Both Duffer and Rosenthal show that automobile decreases lead to pollution deacreases as well. Cars limitaions will lead to greener grasses and bluer skies.
Traffic is a problem that most people experience during their daily travels, whether its going to school or work. Limiting cars will lower traffic in cities everywhere. Shown in
Source 1:
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars by Elisabeth Rosenthal , the city of Vauban, Germany has stores placed a walk away instead of far away in malls. Vauban has its stores located closer, which will be easier to access to citizens, instead of waiting on a highway with a traffic jam. Also in Bogota, Columbia, car and rush hour restrictions have drastically lowered traffic time, as well as opened bike lanes for a new means of transportation, according to
Source 3:
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota by Andrew Selsky . New bike lanes and sidewalks open up a new way to travel, distributing people between two ways of transportation instead of cramming everyone onto one highway. 118 miles of bike lanes have been built in Bogota and hopefully in new places too, to lower traffic and transportation time. Car limitaions will lead to a quicker way to get to the place you want to be at, instead of waiting in a line full of automobiles.
Cars are disappearing anyways, due to culture and people being happier.
Source 1:
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars by Elisabeth Rosenthal shows how people in the city feel about the restrictions on cars. Heidrun Walter said "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Walter is joyful now that car limitations were implemented. Rosenthal explains the stress-free life in Vauban, with its children playing and riding bikes in the outdoors. This happy life may actually be shaping citizens of America due to its decrease in car purchases, and license decreases.
Source 4:
The End of Car Culture by Elisabeth Rosenthal explains that the peak of driving was at 2005, and now people are going through a long-term cultural shift. Driving decreased by 23 percent between 2001 and 2009 in younger people. People are not buying cars, because they do not need them. Car limitations may not even be needed due to happier people and the downfall of driving.
Cars are dissapearing due to limitations, and that is a great thing. Less cars means less pollution and traffic, along with happier people and a car-free culture. A better environment and a faster way to travel, will result in joyous people. | 4 |
da01cf3 | The author supports this idea becausee it talks about the changes in clouds compared to earth,temperature,and the weather.All of these are bad because it can kill humans but it is the only planet that is similar to earth.It also talks about that it is not an easy condition like earth, but it is survivable for humans.
One reason why the author supports this idea is that it talks about the changes in clouds compared to earth. In the aricle it says, "Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive fulfuric acid in venus's atmosphere." This shows that it can cause some major problems to humans if they breath into it since it is like acid. It can also cause injuries or even death because it can affect your skin. Another thing is that it can destroy homes. Since the acid is very acidic it can cause some delicate houses to rotten.
Another reason why it is supportable is it talks about temperature. In the article it says, "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system." This shows that the temperature is very hot,and it can be dangerous because it is close to the sun. It is very dangerous because if it is hot,it can cause a lot of fires and it would be harder to control them. It can also cause humans to die from high temperatures.They can die from burning,drowsiness,or from too much lack of water.
Finally another reason why the author supports it, is it talks about the weather. In the article it says, "Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on it's surface." This shows that there is dangerous weather in venus and it can cause many things to fall and break apart during an earthquake. If a volcano erupts,it can cause loss of people and homes,it can also burn a lot of things and it may be even wrose. If there is frequent lightning it can tear down homes,electric people,and deaths.
In conclusion,The author supports this idea because it gives good information about the dangers in venus.The author gives out good reasons of different kinds of things venus has. | 3 |
da08297 | Dear Senator,
I am writting this letter to give my opinion on whether or not we should keep the electoral college or change to election by popular vote. I believe that we should change the election to popular vote ,because I feel that the people know best .
I agree with the statement the people know best because to me it true. If the majority of the people all vote for the same person its because the person is or has done something good and they would like to see that continue to happen. Also , I feel that the president should be elected by the popular vote because the people are in which what makes the country run. We the people have to work and spend money nd recieve money back in order to make our state or our country be successful. If no one spends then what is are country proffiting from? I strongly believe that the the president should be elected by the people because without the people it wouldnt work. For example, when a candidate runs for president his job is to attract more people and or do something to make people want to say " I really like what he or she is doing and i think that we should vote for him or her".
Even though , the electoral college restores some of the weight in the political balance it dosent reallly stand out as the people do. The people in which, watch the candidates closely they acknowledge what they hear and or see. They will make their decsion based upon what they see the candidate doing right or wrong. The people are the ones who will have to live by the rules that the candidate makes so why not let them vote on which who will run this country and or nation better.
In the article , it states that the electoral college isnt a place it is a process. If you really look at things the whole concept of voting is a process. A process that would not run without the people. The process usally is that when its time to vote for a president we the people must go and vote in an orderly fashioned line in which you must be eighteen or older. If we the people are the ones making this country and or state run then we in which should be the ones having the final say so in which who are president should be. | 3 |
da09d2f | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" suggests the opinion that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Throughout the article, the author brings up many of those dangers but also many ways to prevent them and all the upsides to visiting the planet. The author supports the idea very well throuhout the article.
The author begins the article by stating all of the dangers of actually having a human visit or land on Venus. The article mentions that no spacecraft has survived more than a few hours because of such harsh conditions. Those harsh conditions begin with the temperature. On Earth it is rare to get much higher than 110 degrees Fahrenheit, but on Venus, the average temperature is over 800 degrees Fahreheit. Venus is closer than Earth to the sun, with an atmosphere made up of about 97 percent carbon dioxide and with clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The author also mentions to worsen the conditions, it is common to have erupting volcanoes, major earth quakes, and big lightning strikes across the planet. To put these conditions into perspective, the author mentions that even Earth's deepest submarines would be crushed when placed on Venus.
After the author mentions all the horrible dangers of studying and visiting Venus, all the good that would come from the trip is brought up. For example, the author mentions that the planet is the most like Earth and it would be incredibly helpful to NASA and the whole world to research Venus and actually send someone to visit the planet. The author also mentions that at certain times, Venus is the closest to Earth which would make for a shorter travel time than visiting another planet. The author also highlights that Venus very well could hvae supported forms of life many years ago.
Lastly, to prove the opinion of the article, the author brings up counter arguments to all of the current dangers many people have about sending someone to Venus. The temperature issue is solved along with the air pressure issue when the author suggests the idea that NASA has to possibly send a blimp-like spacecraft to float around Venus, just 30 miles up and off the surface. The author states that this would reduce te temperature to around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, which is actually phisically possible to live with, and a similar air pressure to the Earth's. Although this blimp idea will provide limited insight, a human could actually survive this trip.
In conclusion, the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The article supports this by first giving a list of dangers, then giving reasons to go through with the idea, and lastly presenting a way to fix previous issues. The author knows what he is talking about, addresses each issue strongly and confidently, and supports his idea very successfully. | 4 |
da0a649 | The Face on Mars is one of the most contriversial landforms around. Many people think that it is an artifact that was left behind by past civilizations on Mars. On the other hand, there are people that beleive it is just a mesa, "landorrms common around the American West." There are many people in both parties, making for a huge "debate." The most logical, however, is that the Face is naturally occuring, due to the evidance that NASA has been able to uncover.
The people that say it is an ancient civilization use illogical evidance for their conclusions, such as, "alien markings were hidden by haze." However, the people that believe it is naturally occuring use stable evidance, including, "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution.' Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." This evidance shows that the best technology we have shows nothing more than, "a lava dome that takes the form of and isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars."
Another way to show that the Face on Mars is naturally occuring is the comparison to the lanforms here on Earth, such as the mesa landforms in the American West. In the passage, Jim Garvin, a cheif scientist at NASA, working specifically on Mars exploration, is quoted saying,"It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." Garvin, as said before, is a chief scientists at NASA. If he concludes that it is just like a lanform people can see here, than why would anyone be able to argue that?
People strive to find out what is in the unknown. Researchers are some of the people that put their lives into getting the best evidance that they can find about the unknown. The Face on Mars is one example of many projects scientists have put time and effort into. They will always find the best solution or answer to whatever the question may be. Why not trust their conclusions? | 4 |
da0e8fb | Venus, sometimes called the"Evening Star" is one of the brightest point of light in the night sky. Venus nickname is misleading since Venus is actually a planet. Venus is the second planet from our sun, while Venus has a very challenging place to examine more closely. Often referred to Venus, humanss have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud draped world. Every previouse mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decates. Other factors contribute to Venus reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us.
Venus atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blanket. Even more challenging, Venus atmosphere clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid and the surface temperture average is 800 degreess fahrenheit, Also the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.This are some reason why we basicly, we don't sent more spacecraft. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth. Even though, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, likely we also know mercury is the closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like eruting volcanoes, powerful earquakes, and frenquent ligtning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
Since we already know, Venus is way to dangers to us humans. But since NASA has not been sending spacecraft to Venus for at list three decates. NASA have been working on some solutions, that would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. Also NASA have been working on other aproaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplifield electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. This is humans challenge "Venus" but we have so much to improve, humans are so curiosity on what is outside of our world and if we don't know nothing about them we study them, that what make us humans. | 1 |
da1b312 | Driverless cars sounds good but what happens is you actually get one. These cars could cause a lot of economic stress and stress on people period. Driverless cars aren't needed becuase these cars could cause conflict, technology isn't always dependable, and we already get into crash's now.
The main reason these cars aren't needed is because these cars could cause conflict. Driverless cars sound like a good idea but if you get into an accident because the manufacturer made a mistake, what would you do? In paragraph 9 of the section the author states, "...new laws will be needed in order to cover liabilty in case of an accident." This quote from the article shows how unsure the manufacturer is with his/ her product. If someone came up to you and said "You can borrow my shampoo." and then came later and said "about my shampoo, I'm not sure if it'll clean your hair." what would you say? You probably would be angry with them for telling you afterwards that it might not work. If someone isn't sure about a product that could possibly controll the fate of your life and gave it to you anyway, that's setting up an un-needed conflict.
Also, technology isn't always dependable, there could be many mishaps when technology is in control. In paragraph 9 of the article the author makes a point of why the driverless cars aren't needed, eventhough the author is clearly for them "If the technology fails and someone is injured who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" This quote clearly shows how the technology isn't ready. Even if the manufacturer releases the vehicle he/she can't gurantee the technology will succeed. Would you want to have a driverless car that could patentially cause innnocent bistandards to be at risk.
Finally, why would you want to have a driverless car when we can't even controll the cars we have now? Almost everday on the news there is someone who gets in a car crash and gets injured whether it's a minor injury or a major one. in paragraph 8 the author tries to make a safety statement, "...systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over..." This quote tries to help you understand the safety of driverless cars but evidently it helped you realize another reason why they aren't needed. In the last paragraph you saw how the technology could patentially have a malfunction, what would happen if the heads up display stoppped working and and the driver didn't know he/she needed to take the will. That goes into yet another life threatening situation in which many people could be in danger.
In conclusion, driverless cars aren't needed because they could cause a lot of danger and conflict. | 4 |
da1c048 | Why do we need Driverless cars? Some belive that by having driverless cars that we will save more gas than an adverage taxi. I beleive that we shouldnt have driverless cars. By having driverless cars the world will become lazy and will take less responsiblity for their actions. Driverless cars arent fully driverless. With all this technology and labor, this product is very expensive.
In the passage, paragraph 2 it states "Google cars arent turly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents." This saying that driverless car arent what they say they are. The purpose of a driverless car is for the driver to not have to manually drive at any circumstances. Although the passage does state in paragraph 7, "in fact, none of the cars developed so far are completly driverless. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves but all are disigned to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills," This being said why produce driverless cars if they arent going to be fully driverless.
In paragraph 7 it states "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." Stating that their needs to be a driver in the car to make sure the car is safe when driving through work zones. Also, what happens if the car is on the highway with the speed limit of 65 mph and the car can only drive at 25 mph driverless; what would be the purpose of this car for people who travel by vehical? As told in paragraph 9, "Even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?" Who will be at fault, the driverless car should be "driverless" and if technology fails causeing an injury to a person the manufacturer should be at fault for not making sure the car is fully driverless like ones paid for.
"These smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." Proving that driverless cars are to expensive to produce. Where would the citizens purchase a driverless car, more likely who would buy a driverless car with the economy these days. Most people in the middle class dont make enough money to buy a new car as it is; to expect them to buy a car that is driverless which most likely has the cost of double the cars now, is impractical. The technology used to manufactor the sensors and maps for the cars to follow is too expensive, the money being used to produce driverless cars could be used on students and college or for a cure of cancer not on useless driverless cars.
With all these points being said, I believe that driverless cars should continue to be developed. With all the money being spent on a car thats supposably "driverless" could be spent on research for cures. Driverless cars can only drive up to 25 mph with human hands on the sterring wheel meaning that the car is an in-town type of car; meaning travelers wont find use in this car. These cars arent fully driverless, The point of a driverless car is to not have a human drive at all. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault? the manufacturer is at fault. | 5 |
da1c207 | Disgusting pollution in the air! Terrible, but also deadly for our atmosphere, animals, and of course ourselves. As seen in paragraph 17, car emmisions arn't only destroying our enviroment, but are also polluting our air to the point where Paris was covered for days in complete smog. That is why biking, walking, running, conservative driving, etc are very needed in these days where everyone belives gas powered vehicles are our way of life. While people drive in cars constantly it creates more carbon emmisions destroying our air and environment, but on the other hand more biking causes less traffic build up, healthier, and more businesses open up in walking distance because of the magnitude of participants walking/biking.
To begin with, driving in cars isnt only extremely dangerous, it pollutes the air we all breathe! It makes our lungs become more weak and suseptible to disease and sickness. People may argue that giving up our most widely used transportation vehicle in the U.S. and very profitable vehicle industries, is too much. But I argue, that giving up something that will later in time completely destroy us and our earth is worth it. Pollution is a very serious problem that most people can't seeem to wrap their head around. It's a deadly chemicals and waste being put into our air we breathe every second, yet we chose our vehicles over our precious air?!
Next, understanding what more walking and less vehicular trnsportation can do for the world has amazing effects. Not only is it a healthy alternative to walk instead of driving because of our obseity issue here in America, but it cuts out pollution which hurts us and animals. More walking will create less traffic and more businesses and restaruants in walking distance, causing a better community and economy.
In conclusion, more walking and biking is a much better alternative to driving cars constantly. Communities come together more, less traffic, more safety, no road rage, etc. These are all things that could come from walking instead of driving in vehicles. | 2 |
da2f2c8 | Using technology called the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) in a classroom is not a good idea.
The FACS enables computers to read human emtions such as sad, happy, scared etc.
It uses a 3-D comoutuer model of the face and and the 44 major muscles to read your emtions.
Using the FACS in a classroom is not a good idea becuase it can cause distraction, limit human contact, and limit the amount of one on one time a teacher has to help the students.
The FACS should not be used in the classroom becasue it could cause distractions for the students.
The students could be more focused on what the computer says than what the teacher is teaching.
If the FACS breaks down then a student could feel left out and sad and that could distract them from performing their best in school.
The computer could also allow students to get off task and only focus on what is happening on the computer, or if the FACS is built into a regular laptop it could cause students to play games or do other things on the internet than learn in the class.
The FACS can be very distracting to students so they sould not be found in the classroom.
In school we meet new friends, bond with teachers and have human contact all day long.
If the FACS is in the classroom it could cause all of that to disapear.
This means that teachers could become less engaed with the class and students can become less engaed with learning.
Dr Huang states that "Most human communication is nonverbal, inculding emtional communication".
COmputers do not have emtions like huamns do.
The computer may be able to tell how we are feeling but they can not make us feel better if we are sad, or scared, or in destress.
This can cause students to feel more isolated and make them more sad, or scared etc.
When students feel this way it could ause more school violence.
FACS should not be in the classroom.
The third and final reason that the FACS should not be in the classroom is because it can limit the teachers one on one interaction with students.
Dr. Huang states "A classroom computer could recongize when a student is becoming confused or bored".
Teachers are there to teach to interact with the students and sense if they are confused.
If the FACS does that for them and helps the student if they are confused then the teacher is not there to help the student.
This could also cause the student to be more confused if the computer is teaching them instead of a real life teacher.
FACS should not be in the classroom because it will limit the contact between student and teacher.
The FACS is an amazing innovation, but it should not be found in the classroom.
It should not be allowed in the classroom becuase it can be a distraction to students, limit human contact. and limit the amount of one on one time a teacher can have with a student.
It is important that school is a place to interact with others and futher your education but having a computer read your emtions in class will damage the school experience.
Therefore the FACS should be found in the classroom. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.