essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
895b8a3 | Dear state senator, I am wriitting you this letter to argue about removing the Electoral college. Using the electoral college has caused some disrruption when its it comes to the votes. From the article "The indefensible electoral college" it says that "under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors". Who are the electors? well anyone can be an elector not holding public office. Can voters control whom their electors vote for? no. these are one of the reasons to remove the electoral college.
Also, the electoral college should be removed because of the 2000 voting fiasco that happened. from the article "The indefensible electoral colllege" it says it was the biggest election crisis in the century". Consider that state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors wioll always defy the will of the people. If we the people vote for our choice to run this country their should not be any of these fiascos.
Next, even presidents, AFL-CIO in their time have aggreed with this. they all want to remove the electoral college. according to the article a gallup pole in 2000, taken shortly after Algore thanks to the quirks of the electoral college won the popular vote but won the presidency, over 60 percent of the voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now. Electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner take all system in each state, canidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states.
Finally,the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. This system should be removed you might not know what elector you are votingfor or after that 2000 fiasco why would you still have have the electoral college.
In conclusion, these are my reasons why the electoral college should be removed. first, you wont know what elector you are voting for. Next, the 2000 fiasco. Finally, because it is unfair, outdated and irrational. | 3 |
8963d4c | The founding fathers established the electoral college in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the president by a vote in Congress and election by the popular vote of the citizens. It consist of 538 electors. The electoral college may have served its purpose in the past, but in todays world, it's outdated, irrational, and unfair to voters. Over 60 percent of voters say they would prefer a direct election over the kind we have now.
As with a few other things in the constitution, the electoral college is outdated. It is widely regarded as an anachronism, a thing that seems to belong to the past and not fit in the presen t, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be overruled by declaring the candidate who recieves the most populaar votes the winner. The electoral college is very biased because the presidential candidates or a party's central commitee can choose the electors which may cause them to vote unaccording to the majority vote.
The most worrying is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. In that case, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, where state delegations vote on the president. Because each state only gets one vote, the single representative from Wyoming would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California. Most states have a "winner-take-all" system which could easily throw off the vote and make it swing in the wrong direction and thus, against the voters popular vote. This makes the electoral college irrational.
Lastly, the electoral college is just unfair. Not only could it be corrupted by bridery, but because of the winner-take-all in each state, cnadidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all.
In conclusion, the electoral college is outdated, irrational, and unfair. The best arguements for it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. As Bob Doe said: Abolish the electoral college! | 2 |
896506f | To maintain driving and caring for a car takes a lot of money and a lot of time. According to Source 1, Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, says, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way". Having a means of your own personal transportation does not mean happiness. Yes many teenagers will say that having a car and being able to drive is their freedom but driving is not a necessity and the positives that come from limiting car usage are much greater than having the need for a car.
One negative of driving is greenhouse gases. To simply reduce the amount of greenhosue gases that someone's car tailpipes produce, reduce the amount of driving in that area. Elisabeth Rosenthal, in Source 1, states that "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe" so if a city were to offer alternative transportation, like public buses or bicycles, that percentage would drastically reduce.
There are certain conditions in which many people purposefully do not go out and drive because it is so dangerous. According to Robert Duffer, in Paris, "Congestion was down 60 percent..., after five-days of intensifying smog". If smog can keep people off of the roads and decreases the amount of congestion in that city, imagine what people choosing not to drive could do. That could most likely decrease that amount of congestion even more.
With less people on the road, the roadways would become clearer or less crowded. To ensure that less people would be driving, an alternative transportation system would have to be given. Driving costs lots of money so what do people love more than money? To get things for free. Everyone likes money but no one enjoys spending any. Robert Duffer states, "Public transit was free of charge form Friday to Monday". Even though the transportation was free for only four days, four days of not driving your personal car would still greatly decrease the amount of air pollution and money spent out of your pocket.
Another major problem with everyone using their own cars would be the amount of traffic. With fewer cars there would ultimately be fewer traffic. According to Andrew Selsky, in Bogota, Colombia "...millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work during a car-free day, leaving the streets of the capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams". Less traffic jams means that people would reach their destinations quicker. If there were no traffic jams then people would not only reach their destinations quicker but they would reach them extremely quicker. Andrew Selsky later states that hiking, biking, skating, or taking a bus are also all "good opportunities to take away stress and lower air pollution".
With less people using cars and roadways to commute, Andrew Selsky writes in Source 3 that "Parks and sports centers also haved bloomed throught a city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping dristics have cropped up". As this explains, less cars being used means less money being used and less roadways so there is an abundance of money and space to build new recreational buildings for shopping, eating, playing, and just having fun.
According to Elisabeth Rosenthal in Source 4, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, proposed partnering to "create cities in which 'pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resourced, lower emissions and improve safety'". This statement from Bill Ford pretty much explains the whole idea of limiting car usage to be one of the best things for this world righ now. So many people commute by car and if just maybe once or twice a week absolutely nobody were to use a car, we would be able to reduce greenhouse gases, conserve our natural resource, save time by no traffic jams, and so many more. | 4 |
89666d9 | Have you ever felt the need to communicate with a computer
Personally I think it is valuable to have "The Facial Action Coding System,"in our computers in classrooms.
although many may disagree but we all have our own opinions. The reason being for my opinion is that if a computer in a classroom can tell if im sad it'll probably change my mood by the time I leave that class. Like the passage said if the computers in the classroom can tell if your sad it'll give u a different ad from the one youll get if your happy or smiling. Also , lets say a student is sitting at the computer bored maybe the ad that pops up may change that for them. Many students now a days dont do their work or what their supposed to do because of boredom. I think having computers understand a persons emotions, mood, facial expressions and etc. is pretty cool. You dont know what goes on out of school, to cause that persons emotions. If a person and computer can comunicate I feel like itll help out in so many ways. Especially, for the shy ones or the ones who are always upset. People like that dont want to talk to anyone or explaine how they feel and holding everything in just effcts , both physically and mentally. | 2 |
896afa6 | The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. He supports this idea by sharing that Venus once has been the most Earth-like planet in the solar system. It expands human knowledge about the planet and enhances technology to be more capable of traveling to Venus.
Long ago, Venus may have been an Earth-like planet. The planet brings danger but this won't stop scientist from disccusing how it may have been a sister planet to Earth. 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. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on earth." This indicates that there were very common features about Venus long ago and even now that can relate to earth. The scientist are fascinated by these findings and are willing venture off to Venus and find out more.
Going to Venus is a tough job and can be quite dangerous. So technology is going to need to be upgraded to be able to fit Venus' harsh temperatures and atmosphere. Enhancing technology is whats going to keep people learning and wanting to improve. With these improvements travel to harsher planet will be easier. The text states "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 the way." This indicates technology is being enhanced to be able to withstand the harsh conditions of Venus. Imagination and innovation is being used to expand this knowledge.
Human knowledge is being expanded when preparing and learning about Venus. Its conditions, what it was like long ago, and technology being improved make people learn and be more fascinated about Venus. When visiting Venus, scientist have found that "Venus' atmosphere is made up of almost 97 persent carbon dioxide blankets". That is more knowledge found when going to Venus. Exploring planets besides earth like Venus help people learn about from the dangers they go through to get there which makes it worth it.
As stated in the claim the author does support the idea that studying Venus is a wothy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. By explaining that Venus and earth were once sister planets and today still do share common characteristics. Human knowledge is expanded when visiting the planet and finding its dangers. Then learning how to overcome with enhacing technology. Which leads them to being able to explore the Venus. | 5 |
896d775 | Driverless Cars are a hot-topic on car manufacturers nowadays. Everyone want's the most safe and also stylish cars that are on the market. Technology developers are making breakthrough devices and electronics that are changing the way the world thinks. The only problem is it takes long and also difficult steps , and how long will these steps take , what about the basics like the take on inertial motion sensor's that has still caused accidents still towards this day. Here is my intake on this hot topic.
Is there going to be lawsuits on the company or the person driving the car if internal damage towards the driver or his or hers car gets wrecked in an accident. Are you going to be the one liable for any malfunctions that happen towards the car that you own. For example water damage , battery heats up , or just warming up the car on a cold day runs out its power source , there will be alot of complaints and that company will be unsuccesful. Will there be an age limit on owning one of these , ''Self Driving cars'' ? Humans are so smart that we came to the idea of creating these smart cars , therefore there will be alot of wrecks because Human errors and Technology errors occur alot. What about the security? will there be no start-up ignition key? can someone drive off with my brand-new smart car !?
These problems still are at risk of making it impossible for a new self-driven smart car to ever be created. Well , until the year of 2020 when Automakers start producing these cars , we will have to see through the oncoming years if these steps are taken seriously and and avoiding these life threatening errors. The plans for them and hopefully lets drive and see how it works. | 2 |
89718a5 | In Making Mona Lisa Smile by Nick D' Alto, the technology used to determine what emotions people feel by using pictures of the face is a valuable tool that can be used in classrooms to make schools all over the world better for everyone. The facial emotion detection technology is useful because, the software could use pictures of students faces to let the teacher know who is confused, who understands and who is bored.
The facial emotion technology will allow teachers who have confused students to better learn by letting the teacher know that students are struggling so that the teacher can help the students on a more one to one level. This technology allows students who are normally scared to ask questions or that are very shy to not drop behind the rest of the class when they do not understand what is going on.
The emotion detection technology can help the teacher know when the class as a whole understands a subject so that they can teach in a more efficient way. The technology is helpful because, it lets the teacher know when to move on from one subject or problem to another. This is more efficient because, If a problem is understood by the class then the teacher may not even bother asking for a solution to the problem which, saves time for more important subjects or, gives more time to areas where more students are struggling.
The emotional detection software can let the teacher know when the class is bored and when they are interested in the subject, this is helpful because, the teacher can learn; how the class as a whole learns best, how to teach in a way that gets students attention and, get everyone in the class the best and most enjoyable education the teacher is able to provide.
In conclusion, In Making Mona Lisa Smile by Nick D' Alto the technology that was able to determine the emotions of Mona lisa the famous paining is helpful in the classroom because; It lets teachers know when students are falling behind, how to be more a more efficient classroom and how to provide the students with a more enjoyable and useful education. | 4 |
897534e | Since the invention of the first automobiles, negative impacts such as greenhouse gases, and other enviromental effects have plauged the world in a very short amount of time. Some people are taking action, like in certain cities such as Vauban Germany, paris and Colombia, by taking efforts to reduce the use of cars for transportation. Ultimatly, as people begin the shift from autombile transport; certain economic, enviromental, and societal advantages will benifit the world we live in today.
In Vauban germany, residents of the town are starting to take efforts in the first of "car-free" societies. To most people this idea could seem unpractical, but car free living can be very benefitial, to the enviroment and daily life. For instance, people in Vauban claim that they feel very tense when they own, and have to drive a car to and from places that they have to work. The layout of these cities like vauban, are unique because they are very dense, unlike the urban and suburban towns of america. This makes walking and biking a more easy method of transportation without having the negative effects of green house gases. In Bogota Colombia, residents are also realizing the the benefits that come with no cars, in wich they have a car- free day that spawns a whole new way of life. The new methods of transportation then become centered around bikes, walking, and other methods of non poluting trasnportation. This also leads to a benefit on the economy, by having 118 miles of bicycle paths built, new walking paths, resturaunts, and shopping districts being created.
In Paris, near-records pollution caused by smog, forced city leaders to take action, banning all cars in a 2 day period; and fining all violators of this new ban. This limited congestion in the capital by 60%. Free public transit was also issued for the exception of the ban, even though almost 4000 drivers were fined and some had their cars impound; which certainly helped the number of pollutants on the streets. The smog cleared enough on monday, to where all odd numbered plates were free of the ban on tuesday. These notacable enviromental effects were so substantial in such a short amount of time, that it could spawn a whole new wave of car banning cities to help thier local enviroment. If every city was based around this ideal, it would help their local enviroment, ultimatly helping their economic industries. Globally, this would make a huge change in the world wide market and decrease greenhouse gases.
The United States is also seeing a change in the amount of people that are buying fewer cars and driving less. These kinds of trends will ultimatly benefit the society if continued, by limiting carbon emissions. Although this would hurt the car industry, it would help other parts of the economy like agriculture and ocean based fishing, by helping these ecosystems to produce more effectivly. Places like New York also have bike-sharing programs, which would have a impact on people's health too. Most people do not realize the postitive effects that daily exercise can have upon yourself. For example; if every person in New york walked to where they work every morning; new york would experiance a wave of healthy, happy, individuals. Even large car companies like ford are stating that pedestrain, bicycle, and public trasprotation save time, lower emissions and improve safety.
Overall, benifits of reducing car transportation is too great to be ignored. It is a step in the right direction that people are taking action and rising up for the greater good of their local towns and spreading awareness by these actions. Our future could go either way, we can continue on this path and do whats right for the enviroment, or neglect the earth we live on and face the consequences. | 5 |
897681e | Our population is booming and with it, our car industry. Cars have provided us with mulitple pros for example, getting us places more quickly, and transportation of goods and services is more efficient. We have to know though that with every good follows a bad, and our beloved cars might not be as great as we belive them to be! Pollution from cars has affected our enviornment severley, we have thousands of accidents daily, and we are stressed due to traffic congestion and daily driving. So, limitting car usuage could provide us with many advantages because our enviornment will not nearly be as polluted, and we will be less stresssed out.
Our enviornment has been infected with toxic greenhouse gasses, and carbon emmisions which comes from our cars' tailpipes. Mixed with rain, the pollution causes a heavy smog making it nearly impossible for people to even see what is right in front of them making it very dangerous. We are now forced to hold days where no one is able to use their own cars because the pollution is so bad. Arturo Plaza explains that "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution. (Par 24)" On these special days, we are able to see and enjoy how much better it is living in a cleaner enviornment! It is much healthier for us and is a major advantage says Elisabeth Rosenthal. She explains that by not driving our cars, we'll drasitcally reduce the emission of greenhouse gasses. (Par 5)" This is a great advantage and isn't intangible to us!
Everyday we carry stress on us from school, work, and family life so why add on any more? When driving, the level of stress in clearly inevitable. Worrying every second on how other people are driving, being cautious, and traffic jams amp it up even more! By not driving, our stress levels will subside quite substancioully. Heirun Walter is a civialian in a town with no car usage. She explains that "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way. (Par 3)" Even though she is a mother of two and a media trainer, she is able to live a life less stressed without her own car. Also for example, people living in the town are much less stressed because their children can play in the front yard with out them having to worry about the passing cars. Heidrun Walter explains that she can walk down the streets where the sound of children and passing bicycles drown out the sounds of motors. ( Par 3)"
We can help ourselves and our enviornment by limitng our car usage daily! Limiting usuage could provide us with many advantages because our enviornment will not nearly be as polluted, and we will be less stresssed out. This is not intangible to us, and can only bring our living standards to another level! We will be healthier, and live a better life. | 4 |
897a51a | It was not aliens! "The Face on Mars" was not made by aliens. It is a natural landform. It is a Martian messa. The messa was revealed to the public as an attraction to gain peoples interset in Mars not to assure proof of aliens. It could not have been created by aliens because it is a natural landform like any other massive landforms on Earth. Also it was revealed to the public to be an attraction.
The messa: "The Face on Mars" was discovered in 1976 by a voyager named Viking. The messa was revealed to the public a few days later. The authors reasoned it would draw attention to Mars. The reasoning for revealing the messa proves it was not created by aliens it is a natural landform. Things like the Appilation Mountains were not created but are natural landforms. the same thing goes for "The Face on Mars," it wasnt created by aliens but is a natural landform.
In conclusion the messa was not created by aliens. The Face on Mars is a natural land mass. Just like landforms on Earth the messa on Mars was not made but is a natural landform. Also the messa was revealed to the public to draw attention to Mars not to assure alien life. These reasons are just two of the many that prove why "The Face on Mars" is a natural landform and not made by aliens. | 2 |
897cac7 | The author's points seem to come to one conclusion, and that is that we should explore Venus despite the risks. He supports this idea with many different examples and reasons.
One example of him supporting his idea is in paragraph 6. He says that the only way scientist can understand Venus is by taking a risk and to think of it as a challenge. This supports his claim because hes saying to take a risk and explore Venus, despite the obstacles. Another thing he seems to push alot as a reason we should explore Venus is that we just don't have alot of knowledge about it. An example of this is in paragraph 2, when he said not a single space space craft has landed on venus in over three decades.
Another way he supports his idea is in paragraph 8. He says that striving to meet the challenges presented by Venus has value. This really supports his idea because he's saying that exploring Venus is worth something. He also says space exploration shouldn't be limited by dangers and doubt, which would imply that he supports exploring Venus.
The author supports his idea that we should explore Venus more despite the risks well with many different reasons. Like how we have almost no knowledge about it. Or how we should take the risks as challenges and try to overcome them. In the end he supports his idea well and backs it up with valid claims. | 2 |
8988281 | I feel like the development of driverless cars are dangerous. Driveless cars are not promised to not malfuntion and get in an accident. Also the difficulty of making laws to fit driveless cars would cause a major problem. It will cause a big universal issue if driverless cars develop legally on the road.
One issue with having a developed driveless car is the risk of the car malfuntioning and getting in an accident. Who is there to blame if the car malfuntions and kills someone ? Neither the person driving the car or the company would want to take the blame. There isn't going to be a law that helps both driver and company .
Another issue is the risk of getting trafic tickets. Who is to blame if the car speeds or runs a red light ? A car with that much power could seriously hurt someone . There are possibilties of people falling asleep in front of the wheel and not being able to take control if something happens because they believe the driveless car is safe. Having a driveless car does not eliminate the risk of another careless driver smashing into them. It is a dangerous idea to have a driveless car.
With saying all of that , i believe the idea of developing driveless cars is a mistake. There are enough problems on the road , adding driveless cars would just add more issues. The risk of accidents happening because of driveless cars is a disaster waiting to happen. The world will enventually be ruined because of advanced technology. | 2 |
898bf33 | Is A City Without Cars
A Good Idea?
Imagine city with no cars, thats right no cars! sounds craz right, well what if i told you its real. Thats right the city
Vauban, Germany has limated the use of cars. And from what i resurched the people are living that lifestyle whith straight up happieness. but like always there are afew pros and cons to this sacrofice, like the city
Paris, France how should fallow Germany's disition on car free streets.
PROS: The reasons people are living better, is because they the kept the cars use to a minamum, which means that they have cleaner air, and thats good for the lungs. Its also good on the wallet, because you wont have to worry about spending money on gas and car repairs. Heidrun Walter said, "when I had a car I was always tence. I'm much happier this way. 'said Heidrun Walter" (Rosenthal 3). think about the helth rates in the city
Vauban , laughter in the sreets form kids that have health lungs. and the more healthy you are the less you would have to pay bill from the doctors office.
CONS: This idea is great and all but not the best idea. But think about it, yeah you have a healthybody but your also late to work, because you dont have a car, or your wife is haveing a baby and you need to rush to the hospital quick, but then again you can't. you see cars are what gives us the abilaty to travil to places in a fast maner. most people end up needing a car at the end of things.
so to my conlution; I like the idea but is see potential flaws in the system, so I would keep cars to the equation. Its a nesesity to man-kind. | 2 |
898dc81 | The Face is just a natural landform and is not created by aliens. First off where would aliens come from ? Before this mystery face they said it was not life on mars. As that being said how would aliens be on mars is humans can not ? Also , not only that as said in the passage and I quote " What the picture actually shows is the Martain equivalent of a butte or mesa--landform common around the American West. " It reminds me most of Middle Butte in th Snake river Plain of Idaho," says Garvin. " that's a lava dome that takes the ofrm of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." ." Also , Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped pictures ten times and thousand of anxious wed surfers were waiting to see the imagae the first image appeared on a JPL wed site , revealing it was a..... NATURAL LANDFORM. See there was no alien monument after all. | 2 |
898e566 | They come in red, blue, green, black, and white. They beep and honk while they ride on highways and transport people form place to place. Cars are everywear. What would the world be like if we didnt have cars? What are the benefits of life without cars? Life with out cars benefits the environment, and peoples' health.
First of all, the elimination of cars helps the environment. "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" (5). In other words, cars are higly responsible for the harmful gases that pollute our atmosphere and cause global warming. In Paris, a partial driving ban was issued to clear the air after days of high air pollution rates. After the driving ban, "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France after five-days of intensifying smog" (14). By using cars less, citizens can reduce pollution and help keep our earth clean and safe. Statisticts show that fewer people are using cars around the world. "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009" (41). Sociologists belive that this trend will continue and possibly increase. They belive it will "have benficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions" (34).
Another benefit to limiting car usage is that it will benefit the health of citizens both mentally and physically. In the German suburb of Vauban, citizens have given up their cars. A resident there says "when i had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" (3). Limiting car use also limits the frequency of trafic jams, accidents, and unfriendly drivers in a hurry along with the stress and frustration that accompany them. In Colombia's capital, Bogata, the Day Without Cars has had many participants. One of whom said "It's a good opportunity to take away stress" referring to the event. (24) limiting stress can have major benefits to a persons health and mental well-being. limiting the use of cars does'nt just positivly effect mental health, it can positivly influence physical health. In Bogata, Colombia, the car-free day inspired residents to "hike, bike, skate, or take buses to work " (20). Excersize releases endorphins which are chemicals in the brain related to pleasure. Many people that excersize regularly are happier then when they don't. By limiting car usage,citizens are more inspired to excersize making them happier and healthier.
In sumation, a life without cars means a healthy, long-lasting planet along with a happy, relaxed, and healthy population. Even though cars are conveint, they have many negative side effects. Next time you want to go for a ride, think of all the benefits of limiting them. Rember what a breath of fresh air feels like because the gasses from cars might mean they will be gone soon. Get used to angry faces honking horns, and being given "the bird" by angry drivers because with cars come many conveiniences, but also many frustations. | 5 |
8994e37 | I think that it is not an alien face because in the text it states " There was no alien monument after all.". They used an digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size, and because the text states that "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or measa landforms common around the American West."
The first reason why I say that it was not an alien head is because It was just a natural landform. That is because when the had the chance to take the picture they did and when it first appeared on a JPL web site showing that it wsa an natural landform, that it was nothing that you could now but not tell no one. Some people thought that it was still a alien head but had no proof abut it they had proof that it was an landform.
Another reason why I thnk it is an alien head is because they had digtial image 3 times bigger than te pixel size so if something was there they could see what it was, it was best Viking photo ever so they could not have said nothing. You could see almost anything out that picture even something small you could see it so there wa no way that it was an alien face.
Last reason why is becase when they got a look it was actually a "butte or mesalandforms common around the American West nd it's as common to see around there. I was very hard work in order to do that anyway so if they were wrong why would they waste so much time doing this anyway. When they came back everyone was waiting and when they got the picture it was just an landform and they had so much proof about it to.
In conclusion everyone has there opinion and they believe what they want and sometimes people had proof about that they think is going on and that some people don't they just think that it looks like something that it is always going to be what you think it is. You have to have evidence to back up your thoughts or no one will believe you. | 3 |
899e64b | It's been a large debate on if the Face in Mars is a natural landform. I believe the Face in Mars is a natural landform from natural disasters happening on Mars. One thing that leads me to believe that the Face on Mars is a natural landform is when it says in paragraph 7 "Thosands 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."
So, proof was also given that the mysterious Face on Mars was a natural landform. In paragraph 11 it states that objects were found in the picture such as airplains, Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks. This leads me to believe that all the objects are also causes of this natural landform on Mars because objects like these may leave marks, or spots and ect. Lastly, what led me to believe that the Face on Mars is a natural landfrom is paragrapgh 12 saying "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This says that the Face is way to large to be a human face or alien. in conclusion, the Face on Mars is a natural landform because there was proof that it is, objects were found on the picture making spots, marks and ect., and that the face is way to big to be a human's face or alien's. | 2 |
89a05a7 | In world war 2 the UNRRA hired the "seagoing cowboys" to take care of animals such as cows,horses,mules and other animals.
Now if you ike animals and want to take care of them on certain occations then join the seagoing cowboys."The cattle-boat trips were unbelieveable for a kid" Luke said.
They travel alot and they see alot of places and travling can be sometimes intresting and fun.
It doesnt take that long to get to these places ethier, it only takes about a month because they are on a boat.
Now some people think thats long but it's really not.
They got to china from somewhere in the atlantic ocean in a month.
Not to long right.
The cowboys go to places for jobs and then the play games or go siteseeing its not all just work they have a ton of fun.
The cowboys liked to have fun too.
After unloading the animals they play baseball,volleyball,table tennis,and they read and box.
This can give you great oppertunities as an adult and a kid.
Some of it wont be fun you will have cetain jobs, but sometimes it's better to do hard work instead of play. From what ive said so far are you intrested?
Some of the jobs are even fun and majestic.
If your a watchmen you get a majstic site of what your around.
If theres danger your going to be the hero because you would warn your team about everything that is going on and tell them to turn around.
In some of these jobs you get to work with anaimals and that could be fun because you really dont do alot of work.
The most you have to do in that job is clean the animals and feed them thats it.
Now to me being a seagoing cowboy sounds like an awsome and fun job. | 3 |
89a35da | Pursuing the study of venus would benefit everyone in the society. Gathering information about Venus would give scientist more understanding about how the planet started. Also this could prove scientist if Venus was actually a Earth like planet and if so why did it turned out to what it is now.
First, we know so far that Venus has a very thick atmosphere of almost all of it is carbon dioxide. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration have tried to send a spacecraft to Venus before but on spacecrafts survive the landing. This targets some factor including how thick Venus atmosphere is with highly currosive sulfuric acid and also it's temeprature contributes to those factors. NASA's possible solution to this is creating a blimp-like vehicle that hovers 30 or so miles above Venusian landscape. On the other hand, this vehicle can only stay 30-plus miles above surface meaning it cannot take any samples like rocks, sand or other staff. Also taking photograph of Venus surface would not work because light would not penetrate at of Venus' dense atmosphere.
Furthermore, NASA have been working on other approaches to study Venus. NASA have created a simplified electronic made of silicon carbide and have been tested is a chamber which stimulate the chaos of Venus. Suprisingly, the silicon carbide lasted for three week in such condition. This silicon carbide can be indeed the only craft that would be able to collects particle from Venus' surface like rock for example.
Lastly, NASA have been working on is the mechanical computer. This mechanical computer have played an important role during a World War II. The unique thing about this computer is that is does not need any electronic to make any calculation. Most computer in own modern day are indeed more powerful, quick and flexible but are delicate when it comes to extreme conditions.
In conclusion, insisting of trying new and diffrent craft to go to Venus' would definitely lead us and NASA to success of collecting evidences of fossils like rocks. Trying and failing to land on Venus' surface should not stop us because this only lead us to more information that can expand our knowledge of the planet. Also this lead to even more better innovation that NASA can use and probably also us humans. | 4 |
89a457f | Today in this essay, im going to tell you why we should us this on students. The should also use them on not only on the students, This new technology should be used on the teachers and staff as well.
The main reason i believe this should be used in schools, is to see how the students reaction is the they way teachers are teaching them. Think about it. If most of the students are 80 percent bored, 10 percent happy, and 10 percent angry because they aren't learning in a way they should in schools then, it might be time for change. The teachers should expirement with this new age technology. As they try to change there teaching style, they can use the facial reconizion to see if most student like they way he or she is teaching. If this were to be in schools then, the studend could be more like Mona Lisa, 83 percent happy, 9 percent discusted 6 percent ferful and 2 percent angry.
Not only should the students have to use it, the teachers should have to use it as well. Some people might wonder " Why would the teachers have to use it, they aren't the ones learning?" Ill tell you why they should have to us this facial emotion dector. If the teachers are grumpy all the time or, if they aren't happy at there carrer, they need fired. Now tell me this. If the teachers are always mad and hate there job, how do you expect the students to learn if the teacher is mad all the time. They'll just throw a paper at them and tell them to work. With this new equipment, you can use it to see if a teacher is happy. You can see if the teacher can make the class fun so the students will be happy.
In conclusion, I believe that the emothion reader should be in schools. This should be used not only for the students but, for the teachers as well. If the teacher isnt happy the teacher is always mad, the kids will be unhappy and bored in class. The student won't get the quality education that they could've from the start. Thank ypu for taking time out of your day to read my essay and, have a wonderful day. | 3 |
89a47b1 | In this writing prompt, I will tell you as to why you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. I will explain the duties of this program and the perks and finer points of being a Seagoing Cowboy.
In paragraph one, the last sentence, it clearly states why this program is so highly valued. Luke knew this and it states, "He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime." This is simply an opportunity of a lifetime. In paragraph one, it had stated what Luke did before he became a Seagoing Cowboy. It had changed his life and brought him away from working at odd jobs for the rest of his life.
A second reason as to why this program is extraordinary is that you will be able to make a difference in someone's life. It states in paragraph two, "...many countries were left in ruins." This was after WW II. People needed help and, "The UNRRA hired 'Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas."
Besides helping people, the Seagoing Cowboy program also enabled a golden opportunity for new sights and knowledge. Luke states in paragraph 5, "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China." You will get to see Greece, Italy, Crete, the Panama Canal, and other spectacular places on your journey across the world.
If you are an animal lover, the Seagoing Cowboys will also provide a wonderful time with the creatures onboard. Horses, mules, cows all need to be taken care of. While this is hard work, it will be worth it.
The Seagoing Cowboys program also provides some fun in the cowboys' lives. In paragraph eight, it says, "The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games also helped pass the time." This program has multiple perks and activities you will discover when you join.
And last of all, being a Seagoing Cowboy isn't just an adventure. In the last paragraph, it says in a response for Luke, "It opened up the world to him." Luke says, "It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." This awareness can help you throughout the days of your life. And for Luke, it says, "That awareness stayed with him, leading his family to host a number of international students and echange visitors for many years."
In this writing prompt, I have explained why being a Seagoing Cowboy is a great experience to have. You can help people and animals, have fun, sight-see, and develop your sense of character. you will be able to change your life immeasureably. In the end, the experience can make you into a better, more compassionate person. This concludes the writing prompt for the Seagoing Cowboys. | 3 |
89a8630 | The Facial Action Coding System can help computers identify the emotions of people. For instance, poeple can somewhat 'calculate" emotions just like any math equation. Secondly, the FACS is also helpful becasue it can tell if we are forcing a smile or not. FInally, this also can tell if people like an ad by just smiling and also tell if we dislike an ad if
people frown. In Leonardo da Vinci's renaissance painting of the Mona Lisa, computers have already found out that she was putting a forced smile .
In the painting of Mona Lisa, reserchers have calculated the emotions of the drawing. "Mona Lisa was only' 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angery"(1). According to the FACS software. Then we can calculate the emotions of people by just looking at the gesters one person makes. "... All 44 major muscles in the modle must move like human muscles"(3). Lastly, computers might be able to know when you are happy or sad. For instance, "... If you smile when a Web ad appearson your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be diffent"(6). These are examples of how the FACS can be valuable in the classrooms.
Readers may say that FACS can not work in a normal computer. According to this research, it states that, "Your home PC can not handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile"(7). Also, not only can computers decode the smie people make, humans around the world can also see if we forca a smile or not. "Whoever thought that making faces could reveal so much about the science of emotions"(9). But, not all computer software can idnetify emotins. Just like in this evedence, "Each expression is compared against a neutral face"(4).
In theory, we can tell that the FACS software does indeed work to tell the emotions of the drawing of Leonardo da Vinci. By having the software calculate emotions just like math problems. Also by evaluating if we are forcing a smile or not just by our gesters of our facial expretions. The FACS software can be useful for people who would like to use this to figure out if other people are forcing a smile or not. Then, to confirm if so that person did or did not force a smile. | 3 |
89add51 | in the "challenge of exploring venus" the author says that venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. He supports all his claims further in to the article. he says that it is one of the hottest planets even though its not directly next to the sun the pressure holds the heat in, its hot enough to melt certain metals but he says that scientists ar taking the risk because its so far the only planet that could have been just like earth in the past. he brings up some of the characteristics that venus has that earth has too and he also brings up some of the physical features that makes them think there was living life on it at some point and time in the past. Our sister planet could have been covered in many oceans and held many kinds of life. just those little two facts bring the scientists in and make them wanna learn more about it. venus has rocky sediment, mountains and craters which earth all has. in order to explore venus they would have to be very careful because how deadly and dangerous it could be they bring up a spacecraft very relative to a blimp that they would be able to use and study and explore venus from a very safe area without causing any harm to the scientists on board they would be about 30 or so miles above the surface area it would still be very hot around 170 degrees farenheight but do able because the blimps outer layer would keep the scientists from burning up or getting too hot . they are coming up with other ideas other than the blimp like spacecraft they havee also come up with the idea to send a roverthat is made out of silicon carbide that has lasted 3 weeks in venus like conditions. the scientists only want to learn more about venus mostly for its path and what it could have looked like and to make a breakthrough with some big news that venus was almost identical to the place we live on called earth. as the author says in his last paragraph "striving to explore venus has value not only because of the insight that will be gained but out of your normal human curiosity" for the last point he says " our travels on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." which in total supports his whole statement of is venus a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. | 3 |
89b156e | How would you feel if the computer you were using at this moment could read your emotions and use the feedback from it to change what you was learning. Thats what Proffesor Huang at the Beckham Institue of Advanced Science is doing.
I think using the compiuter program would be a great way to learn. Imagine thinking that the lesson you are learning was boring, and then the lesson changes itself to fit your style of lesrning. Itd be a new revolution in the way we learn. IT could make the experience of learning fun and more intrigueing.
The student could be more attentive and enjoy learning. Proffesor Huang introduced this idea to make learing more interesting for students. HE also used the program to take the place of a human instructor.
So next time youre bored or upset at the lesson youre learning think about the future and about how in a few years you might be learning in a new manner on the computer | 2 |
89b22e4 | Throughout this article, the author explains how people in the world will no longer need to buy cars due to a driverless cars that scientists are working on. The author explains how these cars would have many sensors and would only need human assistance if it has to drive through construction zones or heavy traffic zones. The question to be asked is, would people really want have a driverless car? Driverless cars should not be sold to people due to them needing human driving, whos fault it is if a driverless car gets into an accident, and extra cost.
In the article the author states, " In fact, none of the cars develope d so far are completely driverless. 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 quote shows that driverless cars would still need a human to stay alert while on the road. This shows that driverless cars are pointless, and a waste of money. Why would a human buy a driverless car when most of the time they will be driving it?
As the article goes on, the author explains how there could be many problems if a driverless car is involved in an accident. The author explains, " Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in case of an acciendt. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver of the manufacturer?" This quote explains that there is no certainty that the manufacturer would be at fault for a driverless car accident. Why would a person want to pay for an accident that was the cars fault and not theirs? Thus showing that driverless cars should not be sold to people.
The last reason that driverless cars should not hit the streets would include the cost. The author begins by stating that their would have to be many upgrades to streets and cars costing much money. He explains how a driverless car could run on a special street, but required massive upgrades to existing roads that was too expensive to be practical. Why would people want to pay much money to upgrade a road for driverless cars, when half the time they will be driving?
As this essay is getting wrapped up, readers should think about all the facts brought up to them today. Think about all the construction that happens in America. Is there ever a time when there is no construction? Due to their being constuction, driverless cars would be pointless due to human beings having to drive them through constuction. Why spend extra money, be in fault for accidents even though it was the technologies fault, and pay extra amounts of money? This is why the readers as well as I should push for driverless cars to not be able to hit the road! | 4 |
89b52db | Visiting a different planet would be nice. Exploring different places would be nice. I think there should be another planet or another place to visit and get out of this boring place we are at right now. I think that we should explore new places and not just stay where we are at now. That is boring just staying in once place without traveling. So I think that scientists should figure out something about Venus, that way we can all travel to a different place.
Doing research on another planet would be great. I think we would all figure out something to do and not just do nothing. Venus could be a great one to study and acknowledge. You can figure out so many things in Venus. It would not be much of a difference from earth because the Earth, Venus, and Mars are like neighbors. The only difference is that the speeds are different and that means that we are sometimes closer to Mars and other times Venus. So if scientists or people from the NASA go visit Venus and try to see how it is and how it works, we would be able to find a solution to visit that planet.
The reason why nobody has landed on Venus in more than 3 decades is because they can not last more than a few hours. That is why no one can go land on their planet. Humans can not go on it which makes that difficult for the planet to be researched and touched. There is a thick atmosphere of almost 97% carbon dioxide that covers Venus up. Also something more challenging is that Venus clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the atmosphere. Something else is that their temperatures average is over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we expierence on our own planet. So therefore, Venus is the hottest planet even though Mercury is closer to the sun. Venus also has erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning. All that makes it hard for spaceships to land.
A good reason why scientists want to research Venus is because once it was like Earth planet. Venus once was covered by oceans and could have support living life just like we have today in Earth. Today, it still has a few living lifes that we know on our own planet. Venus has a rocky surface and also includes features like valleys, mountians, and craters. Scientists might make a trip safe going back and forth from Venus, but as in right now they are making better inventions to go travel around and make it safe. They might take a chance and get their safe.
In conclusion, I think scientists should make very better inventions to get other to Venus so they can do more research. I would like them to announce how they can make Venus into another planet like ours they we live in right now. I think it would be good to make this a research and then make more good assumptions on how we can make Venus work. | 3 |
89b77fa | Florida Senators,
The Electoral College is an unfair process. With multiple presidents winning the popular vote and losing their presidency, it is nondemocratic. Myself, along with many other people across the state, believe that elections should be based on popular vote rather than the decisions of 538 electors. Although the Electoral College has its advantages, I believe that a majority vote by the people of the United States would be more accurate as well as fair.
The Electoral College is a winner-takes-all system, meaning that candidates spend lots of time campaigning in the "swing" states rather than others. In 2000, seventeen states didn't even get to see the candidates. This means that almost 34% of voters didn't get a real feel for who they will be casting their votes for. Even though presidents should focus their time on big states with larger populations, it is unfair to the smaller states who don't get any visits from their candidates.
With the Electoral College system, voters vote for a slate of electors, rather than the presidents themselves. This means that when you cast your vote for Barack Obama ,for example, you are not voting for him. you are actually voting for a certain number of electors who contribute to the candidate's electoral votes. Electors can be anyone not in public office and they are usually chosen by the state. This is a corrupt system because the electors could be anyone, and change their ideas to not reflect the views of the people. In 1960, Louisiana legislature segregationists almost replaced all of the Democratic electors electors with new Kennedy-opposing electors. The errors and problems in this system could be much greater, and goverment officials must be monitoring it at all times.
In the event of an Electoral College tie, the president election decision would be given to the House of Representatives, and the vice-president decision to the Senate. This doesn't seem too terribly bad, but one representative from Wyoming would be representing 500,000 voters, and would have as much say as the 55 representatives representing 35 million people inhabiting California. This is not fair because of the widespread views of people in each state. There cannot be one candidate that the whole state agrees on, as people's ideas differ across the states.
There are many reasons to keep, as well as dispose of the Electoral College. The negatives outweigh the positives and a popular vote would be more democratic. We are supposed to be a democracy, and democracies thrive on the views of the people instead of electors.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 4 |
89ba46c | Cars have been a huge advancement in technology in the past 100 years. Although they make traveling much easier, cars are a big reason for economical displeasure. Limiting car usage can help us in many ways. It will reduce pollution, more building space, and death rates will decrease.
Initially, limited car usage can play a major factor in pollution for the world. In "Paris Bans driving due to smog," it says that 147 micrograms of particulated matter was fount in London. This is causing sickness and illness in alot of countries. If we would reduce car usage there would be alot less smog and greenhouse gases in the air that we breathe every day. Who wants to live in a cloud of dust?
More so, cars are congesting the roads and towns of almost every city. In France they had a day where they didnt allow you to drive your vehicle a certain day, and the congestion rate was down 60%. With less vehicles on the road, it gives more space for buildings to be built. Parks and sport centers will be built, giving more kids the chance to grown up being healthy and fit. As you can see limiting car usage can help in more ways than you thought. Also the less cars being bought and made, the more money we can have to better the lives of the sick and poor in the world. to use the money for events in the world aswell. The jobs that would become available to people for building more bicycles and sidewalks would increase tremendously.
Therefore, the limitation of car usage will drastically change the rate of death in America and throughout the world. A study shows that driving by young people has decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. If there are less people on the road then there will be less devastating fatalities on the road. The road is a path to your next door, not soppose to be the last path that you take. I dont want to be remembered as a statistic in this world, so less people driving and more people living is a great thing. Maybe we can see more good news than bad news whenever we turn the television on on sunday mornings after all.
In conclusion, The reduced limitation on car usage in the world can drastically improve our pollution problem, help with more buildings, and the death rate. Now let me ask you, if you had to choose wheither to drive that Mustang or to walk. After reading this passage, which would you choose? Like i said, i dont want to be remembered as a statistic. | 4 |
89ba5a0 | In " The Challenge of Exporing Venus " the author states Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents, it is also true although Venus might be dangerous it is worth it. Venus is worth the trouble to study. I say this because the article states, " Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system", which means that it is worth it because once upon a time it was life and maybe it can be again. Venus is worth the risk because what earth is not the only planet that have life. Venus has valleys, moutains, and craters. Venus has the resources that may one day a human can live there.
Earth has only been the planet that has been declared as life and human-living. What if theirs another one wouldn't people want to know? Some people wants to go beyond Earth, see for themselves how it feel to be on another plantet besides Earth. Venus shows some of the same features as Earth like the article states. The article says " Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit " meaning you their is a possiblity you can go there. Venus is Earth twin well if that's it why are we not going to study it like it's Earth.
All im saying is maybe one day if earth every end we can go to Venus maybe not
alive for long but its a option. How are we going to know if nobody ever studies it?We are never going to know because it's "dangerous" but what if people get to go and study it, maybe its more life! Studying Venus will only danger the ones that are not willing to live on day. | 3 |
89bcb5b | People sould do this job becuse they might like it and you could go acrossed the ocean and have a good time doing all of this stuff and u could ride acrossed the sea and bring you hores with youuke will become a cowboy soon and he thinks it like lat job and he will do it for the time untile he dies and he is going to do it
as long he wants and then he will go home it is his pick. If he wants to go or not he likes that job alot cause he gets to ride and go acrossed the sea.He like doing that a lot so that is why i think he like that job. people sould do this job becuse they might like it and you could go acrossed the ocean and have a good time doing all of this stuff and u could ride hores, and boaut acrossed the sea and bring you hores with you.
He can go acrossed the sea and sea if tere is any danger coming or not. He started a life long advecer. He it was his life and pick to go and he was taken 1947 2 years after he got there he was 18 so he was ready for his life to change. He did't care if it changed his lifehe was going to go at that job.
His life turnd out go and he pick that over going to the 2 part time jobs that he had so he could take a good job. He took it becuse he had heard whet they and he thout that he might like that job so he took the job. He liked that life and he had a good time doing that job.So he did what he need to and that is why i think other people should join it becuse you could have a very good life if you don't like it than don't do that job do anther job. | 2 |
89bd257 | Sir can I interest you with this flyer about the Seagoing cowboys program. No I' fine but thank you said the man. But sir you don't even know what the progarm is about. Well then tell me replied the man. It's a great and exsiting adventure were you go on a boat acrost the Atlantic or the Pacifac and help the contrys in ruin by bringing animals and food for the animals.
Well but don't you think that I could do more by just donating money asked the man. When you donate money it gets spit up and a small percentege of the money goes to each indevidual contry in need. However with this program you can help a country very effectivly by bringing hundreds of animals overseas at a time. But that sounds like much more work than just donating money. If you join the seagoing cowboys you will get to see many exsiting things and you will be helping more than you could if you just donated money.
Well I do have alot of spare time on my hands since I got fired from my job and nothing else to do said the man. Well then you can join the program and help the countrys in need. You know what I will take a flyer. I garentee you will not be disaponted. Thank you said the man. | 1 |
89bedb3 | Everyone knows that there's no only one planet in this universes. Some know that the name of the planet venus was exsit. Others know that the venus planet is close to our planet, which is earth. Scientists wanted to study on the name call venus planet. They think it's possible to study on the venus. In the article "The challenge of exploring Venus" the author support and claim the idea.
In paragraph 1, the author include the idea of the passage by supporting how beautiful Venus is at night and adding this venus have a lot of nickname that given by humans. Mainly, the author trying to wrote about how scientists wants to visit the venus and study. The claim that the author used is scientists really wants to study and visit curiously. In paragraph 2 and 3, The author include that for some how the venus is dangerous and also include the temparature is 90 times greater than what we experince on our own planet. On paragraph 4, the reason why author include the question is to grab reader's attention and explaning why scientist wants visit the venus.
In conclusion, The author tells that humans being curiositly should not harm the earth and he/she supported by including "but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation". So, author would probally let scientists study and visit to venus but without harming anything for humans's life or living. As a result, people will agree with the author. | 2 |
89c32d6 | The role of driverless cars have become bigger and more accessable to the public and companies. There are pros and cons to these new developments but ultimately I believe they are for the best.
Although there are downsides to having driverless cars at the moment, such as not being comletely automatic, that will probably change in the future. The problem now is that the cars only automate themselves in certain situations so the driver has to be alert and ready to take over the wheel. So what's the
point of having a driverless car where you have to be alert at every moment? That is only a problem of the present. If more time and research is put into this project than eventually we will get cars that can drive automaticaly on the road full time without the need of being alert at all times. Human drivers make mistakes and that can cause harm to themselves and to others. Without the variable to human mistake, and if we could perfect the driverless car, there would be virtually no car crashes or car related injuries. Driverless cars have sensors and that let them take the right course of action or brake at the right time which could otherwise lead to accidents.
Driverless cars are getting smarter. With new developments in the technology and a few years down the road, driving could get a lot safer for everyone on the road. If we keep research and testing going than I believe that it will be a big step towards road safety. | 3 |
89c749c | Would you want your vote for the U.S. president to count? More than likley everyone said yes, if so then why would we keep the electoral collage as it is right now? Did you know that when you vote for the U.S. president it goes directly to the electoral collage and your actually voting for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry. according too, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" from Mother Jines by Bradford Plumper.
Other things being rqual a larger state will get more votes than a smaller state. in Florid in 2012 when obama won the electoral election by only 3 votes also a victory in Wyoming in the same margin. Also all larger statees get more attention from the presidential candates. If we keep this going how it is eventualy are vote arent going to even count it will all be up to the electoral college. When casting your vote your vote you should know that it may not count because the elecoral college is supossed to count and seperate the votes and vote for a specific one but tecnically anybody from the electoral college can cast their vote for anyone they choose.
If you were to look at wyoming and Californias votes California would have an unbelivably amout more votes casted than wyoming would. Thats simply because acalifornia is a much bigger state and can easily get 35 million voters while Wyoming can only gwt 500,000 voters which lowers Wyomings chance of getting the president they would like too have. anf to equal theese out thee electoral college would have a group of people that would vote for a specific person but here this becomes an issue is when the electoral college vote for whom they want to vote for instead of eho they are told to choose for and it makes the voting unequal.
Keeping the voting system hoe it is right now is a verry bad idea and something needs to be done about it. It is not fir for bigger states to hhave a higher advantage of getting the president of their choice, and the smaller states have a less of a chance of getting who they may want. Do you want you vote for the U.S. president to count? i know i sure would. | 3 |
89cbdf8 | '' The Face on Mars '' is just an natural landform because when we first got the image there were shadows around the face on the image. Which resembles just bumpy and holy its just an natural landform. Then, that's when we made the picture sharper that it was before so the people can really tell what it is.
That's when the next day the NASA posted the picture on their web site page called the JPL ,just to reveal that the face was not an alien artifact that it was an natural landform. Thats when they got some people who were mad that it wasn't an alien artifact. Perhaps alien markings were hidden by haze. Like in paragraph 9, some mission controllers prepared to look again. Thats when I was like ''no'' theres no reason to send out another spacecraft just to say that its just and natural landform.
In conclusion, "It's not easy to target." "In fact its hard work." We just dont see faces very often. Thats when the picture of the landform got many comments like the ''were just not satsified that the image is just an natural landform." Its just that some people just want to make money from making up any thing like saying its an alien artifact. Some people just needs the wait and see if its really real or its just an natural thing that happens. | 2 |
89ccf66 | As the years go by, so does the evolution of automobiles and the effect it carries in our environment. Technology changes the way we move and interact with one another, some for the better and others for the worst. Limiting car usage will help individuals carry themselves in their environment because it will cause less pollution and less accidents.
Earth's atmosphere is slowly starting to change due to the fact that chemicals and gases are being released from your very own car. As Amercia's population increases so do the risk of the the greenhouse gases, resulting in global warmming and the lost of some habbitats. "If the pattern persists .... it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants",(Rosenthal 34). Stopping the usage of cars in our society will help protect not only ourselves but also the lives of those with whom you share with.
Imagine lossing your loved one in a car accident and never hearing from her or him again. As Amercia's population starts to increase so those it's migration stream, resulting in manufactoring and labor cost. If more cars are being released into our living, the lives of those in which we care will soon never be seen again. Limiting the usage of cars with help keep our enviromnet/society accident free and see those familar faces which we saw as we grew up. "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city, uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, soomth sidewalks, rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic, and new restuarants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up",(Selsky 28). A day without car will help the lives of many espically those around you.
When technology changes so does our ideas and perspective on our surroundings. Congestion causes stress and reduces the chance of a clear sky. Car usage changes the lives of many as well as impacts in what we care about and what we don't care about. Limiting car usage will help individuals carry themselves in their environment because it will cause less pollution and less accidents. | 3 |
89cee1d | In the article '' The Challenge of Exploring Venus '' the author suggestes that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Studying Venus is worthy even with the dangers it could have it's worth it because of it's weather , how it probably was just like Earth decades ago , and it would a challenge for us to explore.
First , studying Venus is worthy because of it's weather. It be having the same type of weather as Earth. In paragrah 3 the author was explaining how Venus has a thick atmosphere and that the conditions are far more extreme than anything us humans have experienced on Earth so far. They was also saying '' Beyond high pressure and heat , Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes , poweful earthquakes , and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on it's surface ''. The weather on Venus such as earthquakes and erupting volcanoes happen on Earth to only that Venus has higher temperatures which makes us want to explore even more even with the dangers it has to it.
Secondly , another reason why Venus is worthy to study is because it has the same features as Earth.
On paragraph 2 they referred Earth as Venus '' twin '' because it's the '' closest planet to Earth's in terms of density and size ''. They also said in paragraph 4 that '' Long ago , Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life , just like Earth. Today , Venus still has some features that are analogous to hose on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys , moutains , and craters ''. Venus be having the same type of features that Earth be having which makes it more worthy to study since it could've been just like Earth a long time ago.
Lastly , Venus is also worthy to explore because it's also a challenge for us to explore. The author started explaining how researches can't take samples of anything because of the distance from Earth to Venus. Which then explains why it's a challenge for us. In paragraph 6 they said '' Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges. Many reseachers are working on innovationd that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfullyto our knowledge of Venus ''.Exploring Venus is a challenge for us but makes it more worthy on why we should study the planet even with the dangers it presents.
" The Challenge of Exploring Venus '' shows us that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents. It's worthy to explore because of it's familiar weather , how it probably was just like Earth decades ago , and it would be a challenge for us to explore. Why not? It has the same features as Earth. Wouldn't you want to go visit another planet? Or even move there? | 4 |
89d63b7 | The author struggles to explain the advantages of what will happen if NASA explores Venus. It is close to impossible with the technology out right now for NASA to be able to explore Venus.
It is really worth spending years and millions of dollars to build a spacecraft that will tell NASA about Venus. We do not even know if the spacecraft will even make it there knowing that the atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbob dioxide. The auothor of this excerpt thinks it will happen. In the excerpt "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author states "each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, sice no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours" (Challenge). Landing spacecrafts on the Venus is almost impossible. There is too many factors that NASA will not be able to figure out for the next fifty years. Also the author says "today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth" (Challenge). One of the major reasons why people still want to explore Venus is because astronomers believe that it was once covered in oceans. The author calls Venus "our sister planet" because of how it was formed, like Earth.
Knowing the dangers of what might happen to someone or something on Venus is a very scary trip that many people are not willing to take. | 2 |
89d88b5 | I would contend that we should not waste our time and money on impractical software like the Facial Action Coding System. An aplication that is used purely for the purpose of reading emotions is usless, due to the fact that we humans can already read each others emotions quite effectively. It is also not valueble because the system reads facial cues and might make a false judgement on a person's actual emotions. Finally, it's unrealistic because it would cost insane amounts of money to upgrade everyone's computer to the quality required to run a system as complex as the Facial Action Coding System.
First and foremost, humans can read other human's emotions without the help of a computer. Since the dawning of time, people have looked at another person's face and been able to tell what they are feeling; why, suddenly, do we need a computer to decipher emotions for us? In paragraph five in the text, the author says, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive 'calculation' every day. For instance, you can probobly tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face.", this quote clearly implies that humans can read each other's emotions very well. After all, why would it be called "human emotion" if humans couldn't understand it.
Secondly, the computer could make a false judgement. Not all emotions are outward, some we keep on the inside and never show anyone. Some emotions, like anger, can be expressed through a smile or by crying.
Finally, the Facial Action Coding System is usless because it's unrealistic. As seen is paragraph seven when the author says, "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile.", the system is very complex. It's clear that it would cost outrageous ammounts of money to upgrade everyone's software to the level required to run a sophisticated system like FACS.
I would assert to you that FACS is a waste of time and money because it's faulty, it's unneeded, and it comes with an unrealistic price tag. A system that can only read emotions based on facial cues would just plainly not work. I see why Dr. Haung was trying to develop such a complex system, but in the end, his work failed. | 4 |
89daab8 | As our world continues to develop into a more technology dependable world we are always looking for a way for make life easier and simply. During our time on planet Earth we have created amazing inventions such as the phone, car, plane, and other marvelous projects that better our world. Now in our current generation we are looking for ways to improve what past generations inventions and make life easier for future generations. One way people are looking to improve past generation's inventions is through creating driverless cars. Even though driverless cars seem like a great idea they will bring a negative impact towards the world through increasing the number of deaths and injuries, and creating conflict between manufactures and drivers.
When a human is driving a car they know their surroundings and they're able to make a quick decision in small ammount of time. If driverless cars were to be released into our society they would be covered with sensors and cameras all over the car. When you get into a driverless car you are putting your life in the hands of a piece of technology that is capable of malfunctioning and killing you. Already in 3 states and Washington D.C. it is illegal to test computer-driven cars. Those states are taking precautionary measures to make sure that people safe and avoid unecessary death. These driverless cars could increase the number of deaths and injuries significantly causing an uproar in the society where huge riots and protests could outbreak. Even though buses, taxis, and other forms of public transportation are hurting the Earth significantly,people are safe.
If driverless cars were to become popular amongst our society all the car companies would try and develop the best and safest driverless car possible. However, those car companies already get our money when we buy regular cars that sometimes have malfunctions that lead to death. These deaths could spark a huge disagreement on whether to blame the driver or manufacturer. In my opinion I would blame the manufacturer because they are the ones that made a "driverless car" key word driverless meaning there no driver required. In order for driverless cars to be safe they have to win the trust of the people and if driveless cars cause a ton of deaths and injuries people will have no faith in driverless cars.
Overall our world has developed into a world that needs technology in order to function. Previous generations were able to create inventions that we still use today such as phones, and cars, but driverless cars are not the next step in our technology based world because they will cause way more negatives than positives. | 4 |
89db6cc | The Face on Mars is just a natural land that is forming on Mars. The Face is seen when Viking snap the pictures. Global Survey spacecraft was the one that really reveal the Face and what its really was. Global survey announced to the public that the Face was a mesa. Many also believe and say that it looks like Egyptian Pharaoh. Inaddition, people engage to the public and attract attention to Mars. So, humans made it become a pop icon and starred in a Hollyood film,appeared in books,magazines,and radio talk shows.
The Face on Mars is just a regular landforming and not created by the aliens. Even if it looks like Egyptian Pharaoh or mesa there were is no proof of life on Mars to create the face.¨When Mars Orbiter Camera team snap pictures it was ten time sharper than the original Viking photos¨. This means that when Viking snap the picture it was not as clear as this one. Then, when it is not clear you assume something by the way it shape like in this situation.¨ What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West¨( Garvin,article 12 ).
The Face looks like it was created by aliens but why does every landform on Earth looks like it is created by aliens.¨the camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Perhaps, aliens marking were hidden by haze¨( Skeptics,article 8 ). Yes, it may has but this camera has the best pixal size and they could see everything.¨ As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image three times bigger than the pixal size¨( Garvin,article11 ). There is not yet evidence on Mars to proof that aliens are in fact living on Mars. This landform on Mars is just like what we had on the past years on Earth. | 2 |
89dba36 | First, the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because Venus is the second planet from the sun. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system. Venus can have a lot of dangers, since it's closer to the sun and the sun is really hot all 365 days a year. Venus is never going to be like Earth, it has all four types of weather all year around and Venus has only dangerous weathers all year around.
Secondly, a piece of evidence that supports my claim is in paragraph 3 it says, " A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. " That piece of evidence shows that Venus has a lot of chemicals in their air pollution and that's why barely any people go visit the planet. Next, another piece of evidence that supports my claim is in paragraph 3 it says, " On the planet's surface, temperature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmosphere pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. " That piece of evidence shows that Venus is a very hot planet since it close to the sun too, that means of one day you would go to Venus you would have to drink a lot of water to stay hydrated. Lastly, a piece of evidence that supports my claim in paragraph 3 it says, " Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments liking erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface. " That piece of evidence shows that Venus can have any type of weather every sinlge day that is different acorrding to the temperature.
In conclusion, that's why I think the author suggests that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The conditions in Venus are too extreme for humans to handle. People that would go to Venus probably would only last maybe a day. The next day they would want to go back to Earth and never come back to Venus again. | 3 |
89dd336 | Have you ever heard the phase "If it ain't broke don't fix it?", well as Americans we shoud stick by that when it comes to the Electoral College.
Politics aren't a popularity contest, they are an important asset of this great nation and should not be taken lightly. The Electoral College is one of the many compromises established by The Founding Fathers of these United States and if they believed in the compromise why go and change it? With this method citizens can be certain that there will be a new president next term without fault.
To ferther elaberate, people might argue that this "winner takes all method" is outdate and irrational, but do people really know what this method is? The Electoral College is a process that consist of a body of electors, 538 to be exact, the majority of the votes is required to elect the President. Your state also has a say in this , it has an allotment of electors that equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation. In lamens terms theres a vote for each member of the House of Representives and two for your Senators. This process is simple.
There is always the chance of a dispute- it happened in 2000- but with this method its less likely. As stated in sourse 3 by Richard A. Posner he sets the 2012 election as an example by saying "Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes." That's 10.4 percent more than popular voting methods. Posner also adds " A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes--538-- is an even number, but it is highly unlikely..." With the Electoral College there is certainty of outcome.
The evidense is there, certainty of outcoome gives the public a sigh of relief and with such a simple process of election there will be no confusion. So like mentioned before if it ain't broke don't fix it this process has been around for more than a century and it hasn't failed yet. | 3 |
89dfaf4 | There have been many studies done to find a new home for humanity. One of the planets that scientist have been looking at as a new home is Venus. Altought there are many dangers- such as the temperature, atmophere, and natural distaters- Venus has many good qualities and is very similar to Earth.
Venus is similar to Earth by its air pressure being similar to the Earth's sea level pressure, being close to the sun having pleanty of solar power, and once believed to have oceans and support life.
Venus is often called the Earths sister, or twin. Venus has a realitively similar size to Earth and is actually the closest in distance to Earth. Scientist believe, altought not able to land on Venus, that Venus has a similar surface to Earth as well. Scientist say that Venus has a rocky surface and, as the article says, "... features such as valleys, mountains, and creaters" (paragraph 4). With this, it is also believed that Venus once had oceans. If Venus had oceans, there is a chance that Venus can support life on its surface.
Not only is there a posibility that Venus might have had water, the air pressure is very similar to the sea levels on Earth. In Paragraph 5, the article says "... the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth". This means that those who lived on Venus would not be crushed by the weight of the air pressure. On other planet the air pressure is heavy enough to crush a person and is not suitable to live on.
Another reason that Venus would be suitable for humaity is because it is the second planet in the solar system and is exposded to a lot of sun light. As many people know, there is a big need for energy on Earth. As a result of this, the Earth is running out of fossial fuel and that is one of the reasons the Earth is dying. If humaity lived on Venus there would be a big source of solar energy, which is renewable energy. But like everything, there is a down side to living so close to the sun.
Venus is the hottest planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is the closest planet to the sun. Venus could melt many of the metals that we use in our everyday lifes. Because Venus is the hottest planet, the temperature can reach an average of 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Not only can the surface temperature be high, but there is 97% level of carbon dioxide in Venus' atmophere. Scientist have proven that humans would only withstand three weeks on Venus because of these conditions.
Even though there are many things stopping us from living on Venus now, there are still many things that we do not know about the Earth's twin. There is still so much more to explore on Venus. But for now we know that the air pressureis similar to Earths sea level pressure, it is close to the sun having pleanty of solar power, and is once believed to have oceans and support life. And one day Venus might need to become our new home. But until then, the human race will stay on Earth. | 4 |
89e732c | People show emotions everyday whethter it's happy, sad, angry, excited, afriad, or confused. Expressions give off hints of the type of mood people are in. If you are frowning then you are angry or sad. If you were to be smiling you would be excited or happy. People love showing expression to a lot of things and we can be able to recognize it just by looking at them.
Sometimes you just can't seem to understand someone's expression. A lot of times you won't be able to understand what is going on with someone. Sometimes the answer is within the person's facial muscles You could try asking if they are okay, but their facial expression might be a truthful answer.
According paragraph 8, "...these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a
"smiling" polotician or celebrity isn't being truthful". This quote means that just because someone is smiling doesn't means that it is thier true feelings.
Luckily for everyone around the world it is about to change. Technology is a humongous part of our lives right? Well scientists have created a machine allowing people to know the true emotions of another person. That means that if students and adults are faking a happy smile, this machine will detect the truth. This device is called the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). Just how does this machine works? According to paragraph 3, " The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles". This means that by using all 44 of the muscles in our face can determine our mood.
Nowadays teens are the main one with emotion issues. We can't tell whether they are angry or not. This machine will be able to tell us how students feel. Typically students are in a mood in which the really don't care about anything. We will eventually be able to tell what's really going on in their minds. Machines like this can change the way we see others and be able tounderstand them more. | 2 |
89f2ea4 | The Viking 1 photo taken in 1976 is a photo from Mars of what seems to be a face-looking structure. Many believe that this is some sort of alien life form left behind, but some believe the reality, in which this is just some type of land structure or a land-form.
This land structure has shadows and divets on it that resemble the facial details of a human face. NASA has been searching for alien life-forms or any life on another planet for years and some believe that they have finally accomplished this. A lot of people think that this is some sort of fossil or ingravement of a once-living alien or a species of unknown classification.
As this very well could be the case, with the fact that it is sort of engraved into the ground of the planet, the most likely explanation of this abnormality is this--this is a coincidental pattern on this rock-like form. There is no more to it. Coinicidental.
As stated in Paragraph 5, this form has spraked a lot of attention throughout the years. Many people believe many different theories; some reasonable, and some not. Conspiracy Theorists state that they believe NASA is hiding more evidence about this, but that cannot be true, because if this was a life-form, NASA would be rolling in fame, not hiding it from the world.
This is Mars we are talking about. We have tried for years and years to get human life onto this planet, and to attempt at finding life as well. The conditions of Mars are unbearable, so there is no possible way a creature could survive. We're not ET.
As stated in Pararaph 12, Garvin says, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte n the Snake River of Idaho." This is most definently a landform. Mars is considered the Red Planet. Mars is covered in dirt, grime, and dust. This could have easily formed with winds hitting the dirts.
As you can see in the progression of the pictures, these are obviously shadows from the sun, or dirt formations. If this was a life-form, these divets in the body would not be fading away, they would stay fossilized and stay put. In 1998, it does not even look like a face, nonetheless in 2001, either.
Next, as you can tell in the lower image featured in the paragraph, you can see another structure just a couple of feet to the left of the "face", and nobody seems to care about that. It does kind of look like an animal, so are we just going to question every single little pebble that we find on a planet? Didn't think so.
In conclusion, this 1976 photo taken on Mars by the Viking 1 spacecraft is most definently a landform of some kind. There is no possible way that a creature could sustain life on a planet like this. This discovery is obviously just a hoax or a coincidental find. If scientists had found this structure a couple of years later, it would not have looked like this face, so they would have never even questioned it. | 4 |
89f5181 | Dear Senator,
Good day, I am writing this letter to let you know it's time for things to change. I have been reading and researching the Electoral College and i have a strong opinion on it. As you know, the Electoral College is a process when all five hundred and thirty eight electors vote on electors and defenders. This way of voting for electors lets the people have no say in whose running our goverment! Our goverment should not allow or be based on "the winner takes all" method. When we choose for OUR president we should be able to choose OUR electors too! Under the 23rd amendment of the constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the electoral college. The electors shouldnt be chosen by the canidate's political party, we should choose. By voting for a president every four years a new party of electors have already been selected to run with him and we dont get any say. After the presidential election, your governer creates a list of all the canidates that ran for president in your state with a list of their representative electors. This is later sent to Congress and the National Archives as part of the official records of the presidential election.
Richard Nixon, Bob Dole, Jimmy Carter, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agree that we need to remove and forget about the electoral college. This year our voters can expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could lose the presidency. Still the electoral college still has defenders fror themselves is crazy. Facts say voters arent actually voting for the president, but for a group of electors who in turn elect the president, and that is ridiculous. How are we supposed to trust these electors if we dont even know who they are and their background until after the election? Who even are these electors i wondered. I figured out that all the electors are actually anyone with a brain and not holding a public office, fantastic. So how do i know they are reliable and going to do whats best for my state and our country? Voters dont even control whom their electors vote for most of the time which is kind of scary. Some electors are even faithless in their party's canidate so they dont even vote for them at all! How can we rely on a group of people who dont rely on their party?
As much as I hate to say it, there most definitley is an upside to the Electoral College. The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that needs to be overruled by declaring the canidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. I personally think that is the best way to decide who gets in. Each party selects a slate of electors that are trusted to vote for the party's nominee. Sometimes the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. Another reason The Electoral College is a positive way of voting is how certain the outcome is. There is never failure in the counting of the votes and there us rarely a tie between two people. My favorite reason is because "everybody is president". This means everybody can make their own decisions and have a great amount of freedom.
Even though im all for removing the Electoral College there is positives too. In a few years when i am able to vote, i will be careful of who I vote for and make sure that there is great electors in the party i vote for. | 4 |
89f8fab | Dear state senator,
"It can be argued that the
Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying thier state-Democrats in Texas, for example, or Republicans in California. Knowing their vote will have no effect, they have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by popular vote.... But of course no voter's vote swings a national election, and in spite of that, about on-half the eligible American population did vote in [2012's] election. Voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election...."-
"paragraph 23" "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep out despised method of choosing the president"-by Richard A. Posner
If the president was elected by popular vote then the voting would truly be up to the people and not electoral votes given to each state. that puts a limit on it. If the president was choosen by a popular vote then it would be more of a demacratic society like we are expose to be. A Electoral college is not democratic at all the people aren't voting for the president directly and they dont even use the peoples votes in the count. If they do they count it less then they do when the state representitives elect the president. the only true way to see "what the people want" is by switching to only a popular vote: it is ran by the people, voted by the people, based by the people. haven't you ever heard the term " Give the people what they want."? Well what are we waiting for? It's time to change our voiting systems and fast before we hit a whole in the Electoral College. The constitution states "We the People", what happened to the people when it comes to voting, we get to vote but we aren't voting for the president (directly) like they have the U.S. citizens thinking. We are voting for someone to hopefully vote for our choice. My only question to you senator is, why hasn't the Electoral College been abolished yet? The people even know that their vote will have no effect right now, like it says in paragraph 23, source 3 "knowing their vote will have no effect." Last I checked the peoples vote is expose to have the whole effect... thank you for you time senator. I hope to see changes soon!! | 3 |
89fac32 | Have you ever imagined a world without drivers? Google cofounder Sergey Brin has envisioned public transportation systems that are driverless. Driverless vehicles is a bad idea because of, safety, more money being wasted in production, and driving itself.
First of all, the saftey of a driver is in danger when a computer takes over. At any given moment, the car can fail, and the driver can get injured. The text states, "The human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." In the 21st century, we have cell phone. If a people already today use their phones while driving, imagine when driverless cars are introduced to the public. People will be paying more attention to their cell phones that the road.
Secondly, making these car will take a large amount of money. The text say that a Toyota Prius was modified with numerous cameras and sensors to make this driverless car mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. Buying a car made with all those modifications will cost you. Also, adding more systems in the car such as, entertainment and information systems, will cost money too.
Driving was always fun to everybody, but with the idea of a driverless car, the fun goes away. "The phsychological aspects of automation are really a challenge." To fix the problem, BMW project manager says that they have to interpret the driving in a new fun way. BMW says they will add entertainments systems. That is a dumb idea because you need to be paying attention to the road.
Driverless cars, will become worse thorughout the course of its production. There will be failures within the car itself and the technology inside it. There will also be more problems to worry about, such as the systems breaking and the car breaking down. Do you really want to sit and watch a computer drive you to your destination? | 3 |
8a12bfd | Driverless cars wouldn't properly replace public transportation. There are too many factors to think about. Would they eliminate jobs or be safe for all ages to drive?
I dont believe a driverless taxi system will eliminate the need for people to own their own cars. In this article they dont state if there will be employees riding in the drivers seat or if the public
will be alone in these cars. If they intend to remove the use of taxi drivers that would cause hundreds of people to become unemployed. If the public rides alone in these self driving cars would they enter their destination into the car and pay the machine? The steering wheels on the cars would need some kind of lock on them so the driver doesnt bump into the wheel and drive off of the road. Would these cars be available to everyone or would they be limited to people with a drivers licence. I believe that if they do manufacter self driving cars they shouldnt be used for public transportation. Instead they should have them for personal use.
Driverless cars would be far too complicated to use instead of taxis. They would eliminate taxi drivers jobs and if the technology where to fail whos fault would it be the public driving the cars, the taxi service, or the manufactures? | 2 |
8a171f9 | The technology that is being used to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is not valuable because we dont need a system telling us our emotions/ face expressions if we already know them.
In the third paragraph it says that "Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happiness, surprise, anger, fear, and sadness." A system does not need to classify thoes emotions for us, or me personally. Some one can already tell those emotions on our faces, or we could just tell them how we are feeling. Theres no need for people to be making coding systems on computers to identify our emotions/expressions. I personaly think its a waste of time to be doing this.
One reason why i do think this is valuable is because in paragraph six it states that "a class room computer could reconize when a student is becoming comfused or bored". This part would honestly help students because when we are
bored or confused we are goning to want to stop learning. So i see why this could be helpful in a way. Also in paragraph six it states that "...if you smile when a web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be diffrent". this statement is good because no one want to watch ads that they dont like. So if a system can notice when you are not having it and changes it, that would be a good help. Ads con make some one click off a videoo fast, like i always do.
I still feel like computers would not be valuable because there is no point in them. Yes its helpful in some ways but i think they should be inventing something
else instead of a system that can read face expressions and emotions. | 3 |
8a1fcce | In 1976 NASA captured a picture of a landform on Mars . The landform resembeld a blurred face . Many people beleive that this martian "face " was created by aliens . However these theories have proven to be false with photos, and common logic.
Since the first sighting of the face more photos have been taken . Each new picture is clearer than the last . A photo taken in the year of 2001 shows the face to be a landform and nothing else . In fact the face is a mesa which is a common landform in the American West.
Some critics support theories that NASA is hiding the knowledge of life on Mars. It would be a giant step in discovery and extremely exciteing if these ideas came to be true but unfortunatly they haven't .
Despite the many theories that surround the face, the face isn't a face at all (though it would be cool if it actually was
)and NASA is'nt hiding proof of life on Mars . And in the the end the theories are just theories no matter how entertaining or true they seem to be . | 2 |
8a242ae | There are many advantages that come with the limitation of car usage. The limiting of car useage can help bring down pollution, to help clear the air that we use every single day on a daliy basis. With the limiting of car usage, congestion drops down dramaticly. Also, it helps lower down stress and have an increase in improvement campaigns.
Car usage has a big impact on air. With car usage, pollution increases in the air, but the limiting of car usage can help drop the pollution down. The author, Robert Duffer, stated "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France..." Not also does the limiting of car usage drops car traffic, but the effect from the decrease of car usage drops down polloution in the air.
Improvement campaigns start to increase because of limitation of cars. Constructions start to rise and more communites understand each other more. The author, Andrew Selsky, stated "It has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city..." The construction of the 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin Amercian city, was made due to the limiting of car usage and its now one of the biggest ones. Also, parks and sport centers have bloomed throught the city. There have been pitted sidewalks replaced by smooth sidwalks, rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic, and as well as new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up.
The limiting of car usage comes with many great advantages like stated. It will help drop down pollution, congestion will drop down dramaticly, and it will help lower down stress, as well as an increase in improvement campaigns. | 3 |
8a26294 | Driverless cars are a work in progress and would be very useful in the near future. With driverless cars, we wouldn't need to drive our old gas ones. They will be able to take you wherever you want and you wouldnt have to dd pretty much anything. They would replace most human abilities with their sesnors and automatic driving. With these type of cars in developmetn, they will surely change the world.
With the sensing ability, the car would be able to sence objects around it, which it will be able to stop when there is something in the way. This is good because you won't have to do this yourself anymore. According to the passage, there will be GPS and a radar sensor; you might not have to at where you are going periodically. Since the car drives itself, there would probably be a small chance of getting lost compared to when you do have to drive yourself. For most of the time all you would have to do is sit back and relax while the car does all the work, until there is a situation where the car can't move because it can't do everything by itself.
There will come times where the car would not be able to move. This may happen when there is an accident and the car can't get around it; or when there are a lot of opsticals around like work zones. You would still need to be alert for when car alerts you to take over. This may be a reason why people might want to get a driverless car, but all you have to do is drive around the opstical or park which isn't a big deal. After you do that you wouldn't have to drive anymore. There could still be accidents when you are driving or not paying attention when you have to take over the wheel.
Having a driverless car may decrease accidents over all but they still could happen. When you are not paying attention to the car when it alerts you or driving recklessly when you do have to drive would result in an accident. In the passage it states that the car seat will vibrate to get your attention. All you would have to do is pay attention. Driverless cars are better than gas cars because there would be less accidents due to the self driving and motion/radar detection.
Driverless cars would be a more better choice than the gas cars. They might cost more but you would be saving money because you wouldn't have to get gas constanly. They can take you wherever you want with you doing the driving. There would be less accidents. These are the reasons why the driverless car would be better. | 4 |
8a27323 | The idea of driverless cars sounds so futuristic, but I wouldn't trust one. Something can go wrong with the car and there wouldn't be anyone to blame. Not that I'm looking for someone to blame, but someone could get injured or hurt very badly just because a car stopped working. A lot of people been in car accidents before, now imagine how bad it would be if the cars drove themselves! It would be nice to not have to drive and get drove to, but how can you TRUST a car?
An accident can happen using the driverless car and what would happen? The passengers can't be blamed, the car can't, and neither can the manufactors. A lot of technology has stopped working or can get broken and a lot of stuff can happen with one simple mistake. Now imagine that there would only be driverless cars, how ridiculous does that sound! How are the cars even going to know the laws?
Most people would say the car would have a computer that would know the laws. There's always new laws and how would the computer know the new ones? What if the computer gets the laws mixed up? A computer can stop working and you might not even know it! If a person mixes up the laws they can get a ticket or even get sent to court for not knowing them. It could keep the roads safer. The car messes up and what would happen? The car gets taken away? It goes to get fixed?
Most driverless cars that we have now, still need a driver. How pointless does that sound? Might as well just drive it yourself. Texting and driving is a big issue in the 21st century, people will think they can now text with the driverless car and won't even notice what's happening on the road. Driverless cars aren't going to make the world better and neither will they stop accidents from happening. Once a driverless car gets into an accident, no one will want one. I'm pretty sure it will happen someday and it would then be pointless to keep manufactoring them.
Driverless cars are just too much. It's like paying for a computer to drive you. You can't trust one! They might crash, break, and even do something you didn't tell it to do. Not everyone might agree with me, but I know for sure that no one would buy one after an accident happens. Please don't risk your life by buying a driverless car. | 4 |
8a2b6fe | Lukes particapation to the Seagoing Cowboys progam allowed him to experience adventures. The one thing it didn't mention in the artical was his family where were they the whole time Luke was on board.
The artical never mentioned a mom or dad.
Was Luke alone with no communication skills.
I think you shouldn't join the Seagoing Cowboys because you wouldn't get to see your family for as long as your with the Cowboys. Yes, it's an adventure but you could get sea sick or worse home sick. If you get home sick you may not know what to do.
You wouldn't want to go out in the sea, unboard animals then go back to main land. No one wants to do that. To many people would get sick and not want to go back on board and that would just put more pressure on you to do more work. You won't know if you have a certain amount of time to do certain things on the boat, who knows.
Luke may have loved all the adventures and great times, but that's only one person's point of view of the whole idea. You would need more oppinions in order to see if it is a good service to work for. Everybody may say joining the Cowboys is an amazing idea but others may say it's a terrible idea. How much money does it cost to join the Cowboys, They never mentioned that either.
Luke's particapation the seagoing Cowboys was amazing in his mind but thats his mind not yours. Choose wisly on whether you want to join the seagoing Cowboys. It's your desicion not Luke's or anyone elses. | 2 |
8a38ff3 | Dear Senator
I have been burdened with the fact that our nation's president is not decided by us but rather by a slate of electors who we vote for. I sincerely feel this is unfair to the people of the U.S.There are many reasons to be against this its hard to choose, but I'll give you my three best ones. The slate of electors could change their political views, the decision for our president is not decided by us instead by other people and their views ,but most of all its unfair to most states because the candidates only worry about the swing states.
To begin with the slate of electors we choose could change their political views. In the world we live in nothing is certain so if we choose a slate of electors whats stoping them from changeing their view on politics. This problem makes it harder to choose a slate of electors because you are putting your trust in them to represent you, and they can change their views. However if the people got to decide their views would be represented by themselves so at least they know their vote counts and it wont be changed. This also takes away the worry of their vote changeing because they themselves voted. And this in the end will give you the president that most people need. So this is one potent reason to abolish the electoral college.
Moreover the president being decided by thers and their views is another significant reason to end the electoral college. This country was made to be a nation made by the people,for the people,and by the people.
So if our vote is decided by others that aspect is destroyed. Also if there is a tie in the electoral college the house of representatives decides who is president. The decision will be made by the house of representatives views on politics so you are giving them more power than the people. So the electoral college should be destroyed and the people should decide the outcome. This will let the voice of the people to be heard.
Last but not least most states wont ever even see the candidates because they mainly focus on the swing sates. This means that most states wont see the candidates. And if the electoral college is abolished people wont feel left out and they will know that their vote mattered. This will make people feel like their still part of the nation and that their not left out. Also the candidates foccusing on the swing states truly isn't fair to the states with little votes in the college. And that is why the electoral college should be destroyed. And then after this is done the non swing states will feel important.
To conclude I sincerely feel the electoral is unfair to the people of the U.S. There are many reasons to be against this it was hard to choose, but I gave you my three best ones. The slate of electors could change their political views, the decision for our president is not decided by us instead by other people and their views ,but most of all its unfair to most states because the candidates only worry about the swing states. | 4 |
8a3c5fd | First of all, I feel like it's pretty reliable, BUT one of the parts that threw me off was when Professer Nicu Sebe said that shes "83% happy, 9% disgusted, 6% fearful, and 2% angry."
Professer Nibu said the process begins when the computer construts a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an "action unit. Then his friend Dr. Huang relies on the work of psychologists such as Dr. Paul Eckman, the creator of FAC (Facial Action Coding). Dr Huang then observed that "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal, even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression."
By using video imagery, the new emotion recognition software tracks the facial movements in either or real face or painted picture of Mona Lisa. By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions, each expression is compared against a neutral face. In fact, Dr. Huang said that we humans perform the same impressive calculation everyday, like for instance, me going to one of my close friends and seeing them frowning I will assume that they're upset about something.
According to the machine if you frown at it, the next ad will be different. I feel like a machine like this would be very useful for computers so they can track if a student is getting distracted, tired or bored, because I feel like it could give the student a warning or something to not fall asleep during a test. And lastly, no, the expirement didn't really make me happy, I tried smiling and it felt awkward.
According to the "Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion" moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but it may even help producethem in a way, which was very shocking to me because I never knew anything could work like that. Reading this article made me feel smarter in a way, learning something I've never heard or seen before. But in conclusion I feel as if this article is helpful and should be seen to my peers. | 2 |
8a3e1c0 | Driverless cars. What are they? They are the future altohugh no one knows that 100% I believe that they are becasue as my generation and as the next generation grows sure we are all verry smart but we dont use our potential anymore at all. For example this is one of the esiest test and yet some people still fail it. How I do not know the answer to that. Anyways my point is that we are lazy really lazy and we want people/ AI's to do our jobs and objectives for us so we dont have to put in any work. Has it always been this way? sometimes I ask myself this question and no it hasent. I have whitnessed many things in my lifetime and I have done a lot in my lifetime. Personaly the google car is great I have seen them and many poeple I know have tested them, But what have we learned about evolution its good and bad well just think of the whole Jurasic Park story the pople want more they get more and then they somehow mess it up. There are many people who belive it is good and then there are the ones who think it is bad I personaly think it is a step in the wrong way, becasue it makes us worse as a human race. Sure not everyone would be able to afford one but eventualy they will and we will al be like the movie Walle have you seen that movie its messed up a bunch of overweight people in a space ship probably becasue they had self driving cars lets be real. All jokes aside we could and it is verry likely to end up like that. Not just from self driving cars but also from thinks that will come after that maybe next we will have self flying planes and that would put me ou tof my job of being a pilot. Just think of how many kids dreams are being crushed that want to be drivers for people they can't do that anymore because all the cars will be driving themselvse. Yea think about all the little kids dreams you are crushing. Also what would happen to insurance on cars if you mess up now is it your fault or the cars fault and then in turn the manufactures fault. This was what paragraph nine was about. This would crush our economy, sure people would be buying the car-> Great for the company-> Not great for jobs. maybe you could tell those insurance companies and drivers "Hey since we took your job and messed up your whole life lets put you in a factory where you can build more cars like the ones that ohh wait rememer those the ones that TOOK YOUR JOB" yea happy ending right? People would get payed a lot less and if google was the only one who released it then that is called a monopaly yes you thinking like the game yea you know where you try to buy out basicaly the whole economy just for one thing and you better hope you dont land on the go to jail spot becasue if you do your SOL (well im sure you know what that means). i hope i made someone laugh not its not the best essay but you have gottent this far and i hope you laughed at least a little. "Ohh but wait theres more for only $4.99 you could own your verry own self driving car and (wait for it) and free airfreshener" well thats dandy lets buy one i got to get that google airfreshener it probably smells amazing. No it doesnt you know why because it doesnt exist. probably does honestly. So there are two ways you can go about this the world can get stupider and stupider with this evolution and the people in the world its like a circus not good at all but then AI would control the world ohh thats fine lets just you know give our nukes to computer and hope that it doesnt get mad at us and blow us up. see then the AI would hold the most power in the world the president would be like one atom in sometihng that has 100,000,000 atoms thats like a fly on a winsheild its powerless. You know you shouldnt kill flys on winsheilds you know why? hmm ill tell you later you just have to keep reading. this is probably a pain for you to read. But this is very well what could happen in not my lifetime nor yours becasue your obviosuly older than me whoever is grading this paper. Im guessing about a few generations that self driving cars will be the norm maybe my lifetime probably not thought hmm I dont know.
Ohh yes that was just my introduction are you read for the next two paragraphs that you have to read. Well first guess what this one is also wabout self driving cars but it is about there saftey (with more jokes). Why does the car cross the road??? ... To get to the other side I know pretty good I came up with that one myself. Ohh wait they die thats what happends when you kill flys on the winsheild the fly dies after it cries and tries to synthisize. you know as a human you can control that, but as a car that is opperated by an AI it wouldnt know if you kiled the fly or not it could just turn on the wippers and gone that fly is. Also the person is at risk if the car messes up and your not paying attention then waht happens you could get hurt really badly and whoes fault is it then how do you prove in court that the car crashed not you or what if the car wanted to crash becasue it didnt like you and you treated it poorly. Also whay happens if you are speeding and then the cop pulls you over and says sir do you know how fast you were going and you so no my car was driving itself sorry sir. Then is it your fault or the cars.
In the end it all boils down to a few things you know after it evaporates. you have you and your car and its your choice in the end. | 2 |
8a3f874 | There is talk on how there will one day be driverless cars. Companies such as BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Audi and Nissan have taken interest in these type of cars. Tesla has also created a 2016 release car that autopilot can be used for ninety percent of the time. There are many supporters of driverless cars, but there are also people who completely disagree with the idea. At least three states have made it illegal to test out computerdriven cars. I do not agree with the idea of driverless cars because there are more cons than pros.
There actually are positive outcomes when talki8ng about driverless cars. The car would just take over and you would not have to do much work at all. Driverless cars have been claimed that the touch sensors that control steering, acceleration, and brakes would have more control over the car then a human. A project manager driver from BMW has stated that they are trying to make driving and car rides more enjoyable. He plans on creating in-car entertainment and placing in systems that would keep the driver and passengers more aware of their surroundings.
Although there are a few positives outcomes with driverless cars, there are more cons than pros. The cars are said to be driverless, but they still require the "driver" to be fully aware of what the car is doing. When the car would approach work zones, traffic jams, or working around accidents. This requires more functions that the car needs to have to be able to get the attention of the driver. Also, to have the car excel to become completely driverless is too expensive. The companies looking into driverless cars have come to realize that they can create a car that runs on a special test track that has sensors to communicate between the road and the car. They then realized that it was impractical to think that all of their problems would be solved by sensors.
Another con would be that the car would be running off of technology, which is not always one hundred percent reliable. At any given moment the car could have a malfunction and could create a dangerous situation. The car could cause a crash, which would lead to another con. If something happens to a driver and any passengers while in the car, who will be blamed? There could start to be some disputes with the auto companies about why their cars are malfunctioning or why their vehicles are losing control. This then makes the situation dangerous and it will cause more harm then it is helping.
With all of the pros and cons in mind, I remain against driverless cars. I feel as if there are more cons then pros, so it is doing more harm then it is helping. The idea is fun and some people will still support it for different reasons, such as being lazy or wanting to try something new. In my opinion, the car is far too risky and could possibly put people in a tremendous amount of danger. Safety is the main priority and I do not feel as if this meets the requirements of safe. | 4 |
8a4316d | Being a seagoing cowboy was much more than adventure, for me. I love being able to go out on the sea and have fun will helpping people with there problems make me super happy and I wouldn't have this job if my friend didn't tell me about it. For example (the world war11) I got to go to many places like China, Europe, and Italy.
I was happy to help all this people with there problems and when we got to go on a ship, we had the opportunity to take turns to watch over the animals at night to feed them and to make sure that nothing bad is happening like fighting our the bottom of the ship is being filled up with water.
So I signed up to watch them and so I got the job. I had to stay up super late to watch them and to I went to tell the captin that every thing was okay and so on my way I slipped on some water and I fell.
I had almost fell overboared but I didn't, thanks to a peice of meatel on the side of the boat and i was happy that I didnt die. I am thankful that I am still alive after breaking my ribs, and slidding down a latter. I soon recovered and was back to the job and so we took all the animals back to were they were.
So we made a game place were they were. We played a whole bunch of games and we did are ruiten, until we had another jod were we had to go get animals and watch over them. I am thankful to be able to do this job with people who care about me and support me well this job.
I wonder what are next job will be? Will I break another bone in my body? Can I survie another animal watch? Will I survie breaking another bone in my body? I don't know if i can survie another bone in my boby that can be broken?
After about a month we get a call to go get some animals and so we went to go get them and I have to say it was a long ride to go to Teaxs and it was close to were my uncle lived and so we got there and there was a huge sand storm and so we had to go get alll the horses, and take them to the sea and then I relized that my uncle had this one horse and it did not like me at all. As we were getting the horses around I seen that horse. The captin asked me if I wanted to watch the animals that week and I said ", Yes I will'. So I was up all night watching all the horses and so I had to feed them. I was feed the one horse that hated me the most and it kicked me right in the neck as I was feeding him. I was out for a really long time and my best friend came down there and found me on the floor "sleeping".
He woke me up and said are you ok and I said yes and so I tried to get up but I couldn't and then I relized that my neck was broken.
So I was rushed to the hostpital and I had to get a neck brace and let me say that thing was a pain in the my neck. I was sent back to the ship and so I could work so I asked were are all the horses. My best friend said we sent them back. I said okay, I didn't really care about that. At this point I dint care about anything. A few weeks past and I was able to get back to work and I didn't have to wear the neck brace anymore. The captine said", No more working nights anymore". I said", I agree I can't risk breaking another bone in my body". So I didn't work on nights anymore whitch didn't bother me at all. | 1 |
8a44244 | On May 24, 2001, about 25 years ago the NASA's viking spacecraft was circling the planet. It then spotted a human like face. It was huge! It was nearly two miles long. It looked like it had been staring back at the camera from where this picture had been taken.
The face is clearly a natural landform. When Mars Global flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin snapped a picture ten times sharper than the first photo. When this picture was taken it was a very cloudy day. This means that the camera had to peer through all the clouds to get this good of a picture. But skeptics say that the aliens images were hidden by the haze. That cannot be true becasue if the aliens were hidden we would not have such a great picture of the faces. That completly shows that there is proof that this face is just a natural landform.
This is a great natural landform and it is very questionable at first, if this could really just be a natural landform. But knowing that the NASA has went out more than one time and taken pictures of this face really does show that it is not aliens. Not only have we taken pictures but we have proof. These are all the reasons why it is certain that this face is a natural landform. | 2 |
8a45d93 | Hi, I'm Kelvin and I go against this technology to read students emotional expressions. This is totaly BS, Dr. Huang and Pro. Nicu made this really cool software called the Facial Action Coding System. Calculating emotions is diferent from coding your face with a 3-D mode of your face that could barely even look like you. Plus there are more than the basic six emotion everbody has. It is still a very cool idea but not for us students.
Dr. Huang said that every facial emotion is universaly the same in paragraph 4, but some people can feel emotions without making that facial emotion on thier face. This software can be an evasion of privacy for students who would not like to be disterb by this software showing it to your teacher and then the teacher would call or give you a private lesson in school. Mixed emotions are even more complecated for the software to know. There are 44 major muscles in our faces are realy cool but, technology is not yet advanced for this to be true. And the Mona Lisa could just be happy.
How can this "Facial Action Coding System" even tell the Mona Lisa is 83 percent happy. The technology is not advance enough to say what emotions we have. How can this software even know the emotions we have on a picture. The Mona Lisa is a painting not a picture, so that cannot be corect. Da Vinci Code is something different from Dr. Huang's emotion algorithms. Communication doesn't have to do anything with the software, but maybe us the students.
And finaly this stuff can't be used in public, who is going to use this sofware than the school. Video games are mostly the freedom of choice for most people . And emotional communication will still need to wait for technology to advance. Who is even gona use this. People do not caare what think about us the students. Making privat lessons based on our faces isn't a good idea. Many bad culd use this software to invade privacy from others.
And this is my reasons why I think this software sucks and should never be used. | 3 |
8a469e5 | In countries such as America, Germany and Europe air pollution is high and one of the main reasons of that is fuel coming from a truck or car. Cities such as Vauban, Paris and Bogato realize that their atmosphere is full of pollyion and have decided to make a changer of that. Although people may not give up their car for a long periiod of time, even just a day makes a huge impact on their atmosphere.
In hte citie of Vauban, Germany you will not hear the loud sound of a car engine very often. This citie is very unique and residents of this upscale community are what we call pioneers. Street Parking, driveways, and garages are forbidden in the community of Frieburg. The streets of Vauban are "car free" except for the main thoroughfair where you can catch the tram to downtown Freiburg and a couple streets on the edge of the community. If you are to own a car their are two places to park, large car garages at the edgeat the edge of a development which wil cost you 40,000$ to own a spot. 70% of Vaubans families do not own a cars, and 57% sold a car to move here.
In Paris, France they nearly faced a record pollution due to excess driving on several days. To put a stop to it the city enforced a rule that on mondays even-numbered cars were permitted to not use their vehicle and on tuesdays odd-numbered cars were too not use their vehicle. If the people did not listen and use their cars on that day they were given a fine of 22-euro (31$). Congestion was down 60% in the capital of France, after five days of the idea of non-vehicle use.
Another city that believed in non-vehicle use is Bogato, Colombia. On this certain day, Colombians used their bike, skatebaored, walked or took busses to get to work. This left the streets of the capital city clear of all cars except for buuses or taxis. This has been the third straight year that cars have been banned in a citie with 7 million people. The goal of this trend is to promote alternative transportation and to reduce secrete pollution in the air. Along with less air pollution parks and sportes centers also have bloomed throught the city; eneven sidewalks have been replaced with more broad, thicker sidewalks; rush-hour resrtictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new resturaunts and shoppings districs have cropped up.
These particular cities have seen dramatic changes due to their no car use belief. One day a week of no vehicles can make a change on not just your city but on yourself also. If every city folowed along with these cities we would find ouselves in great shape when it comes to pollution in our atmosphere. | 2 |
8a48d1b | I think that the face on the surface of mars is a natural landform. I dissagree that it is made by aliens or any living organism.
The reason I think that the face is a natural landform is because if it was made by aliens then I think there would be more of them not just one. With us humans we have many different statues monuments tall skyscrapers not just one of them. For example the pyramids they we obviously were not naturally made but there are many of them that are exactly the same. So if that was made by aliens I feel like there would be many more that resembled the landform or some other odd landforms.
In the 12th paragraph of the article it says this is a martian equivalent of a Butte or mesa so there are many things that are odd that happned naturlly on Earth also. In the passage Garvin said,"It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the snake river plain of Idaho". Garvin also said,"That there is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa that is about the same height as the face on mars."
My next point is that many people say that N.A.S.A
is just keeping secrets of aliens away from the public. If there were aliens than N.A.S.A would probably tell them becuase it would get them so much more publicity and therefore probably more money to fund a mission to mars. So I think that would just be a stupid idea if they kept it a secret.
In conclusion I think that the face on mars is a natural landform and not made by alies | 3 |
8a4e789 | The furture of cars in coming. Soon people won't even have to worry about a license and taking drivers ed. People will be riding in driverless cars that will take them anywhere by road.
Driverless cars are going to be a good thing. Now people won't have to worry about going and stopping at a gas station to pay with there own money. These taxis or cars are going to use half the amount of gas as normal cars use today. With these cars so good on gas we won't have to stop and get gas in such a short amount of time like we used to. Now we can just sit down, relax, and enjoy the ride.
These new cars will be better for the earth as well. These cars won't release as much green house gases to hurt the atmosphere. These cars could lead to many advances in technology like being able to use the sensors that are used on a car to put in securoty systems. Maybe they could put these sensors in airplanes and other kinds of automotives. The world would be a much better place with driverless cars.
Without people driving the cars, there won't be as many accidents and deaths each year. Every year there are so many deaths that occur because of car accidents. This would lower the amount of deaths by a lot because many of the car accidents that happen are because of human fault. A lot of them are also from drinking and driving. Since these taxis would be using sensors and this new technology, the cars would just do all the hardwork for us.
The driverless cars are going to be in the future and they are going to make the future bright. technology is just getting started and this is just one of the amazing ideas people have came up with. These driverless cars are just going to be one great invention in the future. | 2 |
8a4f77b | Would you like to know more about Venus? In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author explains Venus very well. This article has a lot of great infomation.
In the article is said that it is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. If they was up in the air it would be cooler. "At thirty plus miles about the surface, temeratures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth. This quote explains what people would do just to see the surface of Venus.
The article also talks about how venus could have been an earth like planet. If Venus was like an earth like planet it would be worth the dangers to go see the planet in person. "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largley with oceanss and could have supported variousforms of life just like earth". In this quote the author is explaining what Venus looked like a long time ago. This is another reason he state why going to venus would be worth the dangers.
It also state that it would be good for human curiosity. If we traveled to Venus we could really find out what it is made up of. "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has vale, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors". In this quote the author explains some thing we would get out of traveling to Venus and that why it would be worth the dangers.
in this article the author explains a lot of good reasons on why we should visit Venus. Even though the dangers of it it would be worth the infomation. It would give Asronomers alot of good information about our sister planet that we may never know. | 3 |
8a50bce | A cowboy who rode waves
It says that when Luke had to feed the animal he had to go when it was raining also and that he had to walk on a slippery ladder. Next he rode a cattle to Greece because he said it was a life time if he went. Then,the catlle boat trips were unbeliveable opportunity for a small town boy. Also,his second job was to take care of the animals every hour. For instance he couldnt work because his ribs wre crack. Then he rode to different countries. Its says Luke always found time to have fun on board,especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. Then it says,but being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than a adventure for Luke it opend the world to him. Its also explains he has to take care of horses cows and mules that were shipped overseas. Next it helps countries recover their food supplies,animals and more 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA.For instance he knew it was an opportunity of life time. Luke and don signed up for it. don invited him to Europe and they had to ride a cattle. They also went to New Orleans for orders. He said it prepared him for work because he had things to take care of something. He said it opened the world to him. Then he said he went to different countries all over the world he got different jobs also. Thats how he convine others. | 1 |
8a513f7 | Driverless cars are currently being developed continuously.
Automakers are continuing their work and testing problems ahead that will soon be solved in driverless cars.
Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020.
As technology advances, the standard of living for humans begin to change.
Full driverless cars should not be invented.
None of the cars developed so far are completely driverless.
There is a certain point that automakers should stop working at driverless cars. "While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver." The driver will not watch the road in a driverless car due to the attention span of a typical human. "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" The driver, indeed, will get bored waiting for their turn to drive which would lead to more distractions when it's his or her turn to drive. The driver will not watch the road in a driverless car due to the attention span of a typical human.
Driverless cars being created will lead to more distractions to the human eye.
Let alone without driverless cars, humans constantly get distracted while driving.
The invention of driverless cars would allow humans to be more active on their cell phones and such while driving.
Driverless cars will distract humans from their environment.
If a driverless car causes an accident: will he or she be aware of the situation before someone gets hurt or will the attention of the human be elsewhere?
Driverless cars may be a blessing for lazy humans, though, a car can not be perfected to where it is one-hundred percent impossible to get into an accident.
Different laws would have to be created in order to allow driverless cars into roads.
Are driverless cars worth a big change within our transportation system of laws or could we drive how we normally drive ourselves with no change?
There is nothing wrong with our transportation system in todays society.
Driverless cars are not safe.
Improvements are being made, although, changes within our transportation system are not necessary.
A lot will have to change for driverless cars to be used on a daily basis such as laws.
Driverless cars will allow us to get distracted even easier than we do today!
Who do we blame after we actually get into an accident while "operating" a driverless car - the driver of the manufacturer? | 3 |
8a526cd | The way we should change the way we choose our United States president. I am against the Electoral college. I feel like with the Electoral college my vote does not matter. The Electoral college is a pretty unfair way to choose out president. I think its time to try something new. A expirement prehaps. How do we know the popular vote system doesn't work if we had not tried it. You know what they say don't knock it to you try it. We can avoid what happend in 1968 or 2000. Im just saying and im not the only one saying this but the Electoral College is unfair and irrational.
The Electoral college is a voting castrophe. Many people fell like their vote doesn't matter or even make a differance. Their not the only ones. Some people just feel like the Electoral College is way too complicated to understand. Some just rather have their vote go straight to the president. Well they say their trust is rarely broken. Well thats still means it can be broken. Also, whats with the ''winner take all'' ? People here that say '' wait what?''. Well to start off its a little bit unfair. We the people just want to pick our president of united states not some electors who might not even be that loyal to the person you voted for any way. We young generartion should try something new in the future. Which im saying that the Electoral College is a little bit old and outdated dont yout think.
This Electoral College can be unfair and irrational at times. Also complicated as well. We voters wish their was an easier way to choose the president. well their is, we just haven't been useing it yet. They say they want to avoid another 1968. Or, even a 2000 election. Well i haven't seen any change or concern for this matter. Instead of chaging the rules , how about we change the voting systems in all. People have been trying to abolish the Electoral College for decades. People like President John F. Kennedy. Even one of our presidents was oppose to the Electoral College. Who is the Electoral Collage any way. Just some people who Dont currently hold office. Well whats the point of knowing who your voting for but not actully know who your voting for. Basiclly voting for someone who can not be trusted or not be loyal enough. We have to vote on trust and confidence. I know i want my vote to matter.
So you see why we should change the way we choose our president. The Electoral college is a pretty unfair way to choose out president. I think its time to try something new. Many people fell like their vote doesn't matter or even make a differance. I just want to seeif any change can happen in the future. This Electoral College can be unfair and irrational at times. Also complicated as well. If we want to avoid 1968 or 2000 lets make a change. Atleast lets try it out for a election or two to see how it works. Instead of going off of this is what we been using so we are going to keep using it. Im just saying and im not the only one saying this but the Electoral College is unfair and irrational. | 4 |
8a52d1e | People have been dreaming of driverless cars for a long time now. Not having to do anything but sit there and relax, but is it always safe? Just because there is enchanced technology that makes people lives easier, that doesn't always necessariy mean it's safe. There are positives and negatives having driverless cars. Driverless cars would be a great pleasure to have. Just remember it does have it's downsides.
Driverless cars would make majority of people's dreams come true. Not only will people not have to drive as much anymore but it also makes their lives a whole lot easier. A lot of people are probably wondering how they could possibly just sit there in their car doing nothing as this car takes them to their destination. In paragraph 2, Google studies show, "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." The driver is still aware of everything that the car is doing. It alerts them to let them know what is going on and keeps the driver aware of their surroundings better than the driver do alone. If something does happen the driver always has the choice to take over or not.
Driverless cars use sensors to help the vehicle move and prevent accidents. With technological sensors, the car would have better view on the road rather than the driver itself. Their sensors are so enhanced that it replicates the human skill of driver. Some cars now actually use sensors to hep the driver. As stated in paragraph 4, "Google's modified Tayota Prius uses position-estimating
sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and a inertial motion sensor." All these sensors to keep the car and passagers safe. The more sensors there are the more alert the car is from any danger. This helps the car see more than the human ability of seeing.
The idea of driverless cars seems so well to not have a downside. There is always a catch when it comes to things like these. Sensors and alerts on a car may seem helpful but what happens if something goes wrong and that person gets into an accident? Technology isn't always perfect. There are glitches and with glitches things could go terribly wrong. In paragraph 9 it states that, "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?" There is a really good chance that this could happen. Are people really going to risk this?
There are pros and cons to having driverless cars. It could either make people's lives easier or risk it. It all depends on the person whether they are going to get the car or not. Even though driverless cars will help an individual, it could also go wrong. | 4 |
8a53680 | Yes i am aginst these driverless cars because anything can happen at any certain time like what if the car doesnt alert you if car is coming to close to you or if you are about to get into a crash , You could end up losing your life and they wouldnt know if the car failed or not or if it was just you who did something wrong and the manufacturer would seriously have to deal with some big problems if the car was part of the reason why that person died .
Other reasons why i am against driverless cars is that they dont seem that safe just because you tested just that ONE car doesnt mean any other car you make cant mailfunction either , there is ONLY five known places that are lleagal where you can actally test a driverless car that means every other state or country doesnt mean its safe because its illeagal , I wont believe it till i see its safe because many things could go so wrong , Like what if the car doesnt alert you in time when your trying to back up and you hit a car that would cause serious problems . Also what if there is a crash is about to happen and the car is coming straight towards you and the car alerts you to late what will happen then ? . You could end up dead because the car didnt alert you in time .These cars could aslo be very expensive not everybody could afford one because people are struggling ALOT , the only people who could really probably afford these are millionaires and other RICH people in the world . Even big brand name car comapines like BMW , GM , Mercedes-Benz , Audi , Nissan and even google even though they are not car company they just want to be the first ones to make a driverless car . Those big name brand car companies say that there will be driverless cars by 2020 which is about four years away from now but any thing can happen within fours years .
Nothing will change my mind about these cars unless i have proof that they can make these cars safe and affordable for people even though the JUST ONE car is millions but there main priority should be about the safety for people and they should ATLEAST make a back up system for the car incase something bad happens or if the car loses cointrol they should atleast make a way to make the car to automatically shut off or stop . so they should really stop worring about the design of the car and start worring about peoples safety. | 3 |
8a54108 | Technology has come a long way to create a Facial Action Coding System. This system can make it easier for a lot of people to figure out what emotions people are feeling. Putting this technology in schools would make it easier for teacher to understand how students are feeling about their lessons. The Facial Coding System would be a great idea to put on school computers to find out what the students are feeling.
Making technology like this is very advanced and clever. Many students want to be nice to their teacher when they ask if they like the lessons. Putting this technology while they are teaching the lessons would be a good idea for how the students actually feel. There would probably be some cons with this technology though. The students could be thinking of something else or being distracted while it is scanning their face. making the scan inaccurate because they're not reacting to the teache they are reacting to something that happened earlier that day or soemthing else on their computer. Although the technology would have a lot of pros. Scanning their faces when they are paying attention could be very helpful. Teacher could learn to make their lessons more interesting with this technology. Knowing if the student are happy during a lessing could make the teacher do more of what she was doing. Also using this technology could help teachers understand if their students aren't feeling well during their class period. This could be helpful for teacher because pople never want accidents in the classroom. Using this technology could helo teacher recognizze when students are nervouse or anxious to help them calm down and be more relaxed in the classroom.
The Facial Action Coding System is a great new tool for teacher to use in the classroom. Teachers always need new ideas for teaching new information to a classroom. Using this technology would make it a lot easier to understand the students. Teachers often forget about the feelings of their students. This is a great reminder of the information that they're giving their student is important for the students to understand and comprehend. Reading students' expressions would be a great idea for the classroom. | 3 |
8a54ace | Venus is a very questionable topic because the heat , no sunlight and the amount of radiation and phisical thickness of heat in venus. In my opinion venus is very very dangerous to live on because its so hot and the amount of energy is not so good for humans and there health. Venus the following desribes how the autor feels about Venus and how i feel about venus .
Venus is very dangerous and questionable place that in my opinion the amout of heat could be very harmful to our skin the author thinks that its a good idea to live on venus well i beg to differ because people on earth already get sunburnt just from a little bit of sun at the beach. Or at a swimming pool .Just think of how many hospital visits venus would have .Hang on there isnt anything on venus but heat and radiation and dry air there isnt any hospitals .Well thats another concern there as well as the heat and radiation that are bad for humans .
The author suggests that humans should go to Venus because there might have been life on venus because its earths twin. Also he says "If we could get more research about venus than we might have a strong possibility". Also now days everone has a cell phone or some type of device thats electronic well it says in the pasage that "Just imagine exposing a cell such as a phone or a tablet to acid or heat on venus capable of melting tin". That there alone is a problem because kids teens adults act like they cant live without any celluar devices whenever a techer takes it from a student at school they argue throw temer tantrums yell scream etc. Just imagine going to venus and hearing all the complaining fromthose teens and kids and infants crying because they cant have there leap frog game or there tablet full of cool games and stuff on it .
All i'm trying to say is venus is not a good place because people get tired of summer and want to have winter or fall just something a lot cooler than the hottness all the time .There goes another complaint the phones and the heat wow I would get irratated after a while of complaining .
In conclusion, venus is going to be fun and exiting to most people until they are there all the time and think about all the heat resisting clothes and shoes headbands etc. We'll haft to wear 24/7 speaking of 24/7 is the time still the same will it be difficult for people on earth to find out and live on venus with the time change . All i'm trying to say is that there are some people who are going to agree then when they get there and feel the hotness and the radiation and see there phones, tablets, leap frogs , etc. all melt away in the heat and radiation 9 times out of 10 there going to want to go back to earth . Also a lot of people dislike and sometimes people hate change . A new phone from a android to a iphone is little but moving to another planet that's huge . | 3 |
8a56381 | Driverless cars are a very interesting but not something I'm ok with want happening. I'm not saying I'm superstitous but something bad will come from these driverless cars. I'm against driverless cars because hackers and the possible future that will come from this starting point. Other than that, I don't care for what it does or who gets it.
One of my reasons for rejecting driverless cars is hackers. I know not many people have hacker issues but the possibilty is still there. Hackers are becoming smarter each day as technology advances. What if hackers can get into the cars systems? I don't know about you but I find this very uncomfortable. Then there is the possibilty of technology rising up against us like the movie I-robot.
My second reason for rejecting driverless cars is the future this could lead us to. The movie Wall - E for explain. To me, I see our technology taking over what use to be our active lives. To be honest, this is the most laziest generation I've ever seen. We will start to become lazier and fatter because of it. That's what I see happening because driverless cars will start the chain reaction for that.
In conclusion, driverless cars are bad for an average human. Only reason I agree to have driverless cars are for those who are blind or have some form a disability. Other than that, I see no true reason for this invention. The more inventions I see for things to make something easier to be done, the more I will cringe on the inside and be vocal about it. Those inventions just prove we humans want to take the easy way out for everything. | 2 |
8a5813c | In the article "Unmasking the Face on mars" their was a landform face shape on mars located at 41 degrees north latitude. Many people believe that the face on mars was alien marking but truth is it was a natural landform, there was no alien monument after all.
"Thousands of anxioius 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." This was located in paragraph 7 sentence 2 this is stating that this was just a landform.
From the looks of it, it would be questionable about aliens becasue it looks like a face that people wouldn't exspect for a landform to look like, but stutistics shows that it was just a landform and nothing else. Not everyone will agree to this day but scientist have done all the research as it is stated in this passage but the its a landform and research can prove it. | 2 |
8a5aed7 | electoral college is a process not a place. the Electoral college work on the selection of the electors where they vote for president and vice president couting each voter by congress. large populations in states lose by virtue in the mal-apportionment in Senate decreed in the Constitution. popular votes were mostly in florida but in the year 2012 when obama was just beginning to be president, he got 29 eectoral votes it was a success in the same margin in wyoming would net the winner only 3 electoral votes. other things being the same alot of large states get more attention from the presidential candidates in a campaign than some small states do. the electoral college is supossed to be a procces for the electors to vote for president and vice president and every 4 years theres gonna be someone new thats facing the president to be voted for the new president of the united states but when the electors come and vote if the president will still stay the president then he,ll become it for another 4 years but if the guy facing his way to be our new president mr. obama will have to stay as vice president. in columbia the district is allocated 3 electors and something like a state for purposes because of the electoral college. the reason in the following discussion the word "state" is also refered as the district of columbia. each person who is running for president your state has his or her own group of electors they are generally chosen to the candidates political party but the state laws vary on how there electors get selected on what there | 1 |
8a5fd0f | The electoral collage is a founding fathers established in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by a vote. There are consis of 588 electory and majority of 270 electory votes is required elect the president. So there for electors generally choose by candidates political partys. Presidential election is held every four years but it on a Tuesday after the first monday.
whoever you have choosen the states elector you would be really be voting for your next president .
How that works is when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate elector.
And who ever has the most votes the winner "takes it all" type of sytem to the winning presidential candidates.
After the elcetion has ended your governor takes it time for the "centificate of Ascertaniment" for all the candidact ran for the preisdent . Also for the Centificate of Ascertaniment makes it in your state and shows which electors will represent your state. Richard N, jimmy C , and Bob D the u. s chamber of comerce were clearing the eletoral collage why they were thinking about doing this is beacuase many people argreed with them and told them they should beacause it wasnt right . So those are the some things that the elector candidates say about the whole procces | 1 |
8a60615 | So you think that the face was created by aliens? Well I have some news for you, it wasn't created by aliens its just a nautral landform.
You and many other people may want to believe that there was life on mars years ago and it hasn't been discovered yet, if there was ever any life on Mars we would've find many more clues by now. If anyone has read this article then they would know that it is just a landform and there is and never was any sight of life on Mars. In this article it says " 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 afrter all." not only does the article say that but we say it also as a part of NASA I do a lot of studying and I came to find out that there was never any type of life on Mars. All the talk about aliens is uncalled for, we would have found more eveidence and even different types of clues if there was life on Mars. For the ones out there who say "NASA would rather hide" isn't true at all we want to let the people know whats going on, we want to keep them updated. But when theres nothing up there and we have half the country thinking there is thats a problem, which we have to let down easily. Yes the face is located in a coudy part but that doesn't mean we are wrong. "But not everyone was satisfied. The face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north and martian latitude where it was winter in April '98-- a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet." So just because it was winter and hard to see you people are telling me that we are wrong? That we are lying? Nope, not true. Even with the pictures from summer... Its just a landform, anything could have created it just like here on earth. So theres no need for everyone to get all shook up and angry with NASA because they wanna believe that there is actually life on Mars. | 2 |
8a62e5b | I believe that we should get rid of Electoral College because it seems like that it causes more problems then it does with popular vote. So i think that we should use elections to popular vote over electoral voting. For example, the disaster affect which the state legislatures took responsibilty for picking electors, and those electors could always defy the will of the people. Even though that the electoral college has some pros it has more cons.
There are a couple things wrong with the Electoral college. In the electoral college system you dont vote for your president you vote a state of electors who in turn elect the president. If your vote won then the state that you live in would get that amount of electoral votes. For example, if you live in florida and your slate of electors won then your president would get 29 electoral votes. But in there has been a few instances where this system has not worked becasue of how close the votes were to each other. If there was a tie then it would be sent to the house of representatives where the state delegations vote on the president. This is one of the reasons why I dont like the electoral college because its one big long process when actually it could only take a couple days if we used popular vote instead of electoral college.
At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner take all system in each state canidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. It is not fair to alot of people in our country that they have to be put into this long process of determining who our president is going to be when they could just vote and then they'll be done if they use the popular vote system. If we get rid of the electoral college then the popular vote system will be a more quick and efficent way of voting for our president. Also, there will be less tension in our country and less aruguments going on.
It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments aganist direct elections are spurious at best. Even though there might some reasons why you believe that we should still have the electoral college there are more dangers and risks if we keep the electoral collge. But if we get rid of the electoral college and put in our popular vote system then choosing our president will a lot easier and it will take away controversy in our counrty. | 4 |
8a64697 | The author is definetley fond of studying Venus and different ways to get there. The author goes into detail on how Venus is a very different but at the same time similar to Earth's atmosphere. The problem is that there has not been a single succesful mission to Venus, which means scientists have no concrete evidence that humans can survive there.
The author stated, "More importantly, researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anyhting else, from a distance"(6). This is very important because if the scientists can not take samples then no one will be able to figure out if humans could actually survive on Venus. The sooner scientists get to test the surface of Venus, the sooner humans will find out if they are able to live on Venus in the future. Venus is similar to Earth for a few reassons for example, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth"(4). This quote is discussing that Venus was once the most Earth like planet because they both had very similar atmospheres and features. As the quote mentioned Venus was covered largely with oceans, Earth is 70% + covered in ocean. If signs of life on Earth are possible from having many oceans it is logical to predict that Venus had life in it's oceans at one time.
In conclusion, It is still a problem that there has not been one succesful mission to Venus, resulting in scientists having no concrete evidence that humans could survive on Venus in the future. Once there is an invention that allows scientists to get to Venus's surface and take samples. It will be a quick process from there to find out if humans can survive on Venus's atmosphere. The fact that scientists have found that Venus once had a lot of space covered in oceans. This can help one predict that there was also some living organisms on Venus's surface. If the conditions are still the same scientists could test the area to figure out if it would be possible for humans to live there in the future. | 3 |
8a66f36 | The article of "Driverless Cars Are Coming" gives some positive and negative situations on the driverless cars. In my opionion I would be most certainly against the driverless car. The driverless cars maybe a new cool car but there's just a lot of bad things that can come out wrong with these new kind of cars. The driverless cars are not the most important car to invent in my opinion. A lot of safety is at risks with thesekind of cars. The sensors with these cars are very imporatnt and what if they all broke? The cars would be useless. If a car isn't safe by law it can not be used and the driverless cars have no safety concepts about them at all.
For instant saftey. The sensors , are the most important object in the car especially the roof sensor. What if the roof top sensor completly just stop working, there would be nothing anyone could do. If any of the senors went out on iany driverless cars the owner couldn't even use his/her car. The driverless cars could also shout down at anytime out of nowhere and there would be nothing to do for it. These driveless cars can also take off on there own when the driver isn't even ready to start to take off and go. Companies are just making these cars becuase they think that they are cool and that some peolpe out in the world are thinking that there cool too. They also know that they can get lot's of big money of these driverless cars. Driverless cars should not go pass the law where it says that "traffic laws are written with assumption that only safe cars has a human driver in control at all times." Driverless cars are not safe at all and a human diver isn't in control of the car, the car is doing it all on its on. "If the technology fails and someone is uinjuried, who is at fault ... the driver or the manufacturer?"
Automakers swear that they are "continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved." But when really will all of these problems with the driverless cars will be all the way solved? The driverless cars are at risk. Even the own automarkers do not know what all the driverless cars are capble of.
Manufactors just want too bring "entertainment" to the people. When all fails with the driverless cars states and compines are going to start to get sued from these cars. Then these manufactors and automakers want think that the driverless cars are all that cool anymore.
Driverless cars are very expenice. Are these companies going to keep the driverless cars coming if there wasn't any money made of them? Know one is even for sure that anyone evens wants a driverless car. Most people that are drivers say that they like the control of driving that there the power of the car. To have a car doing just about everything in the car wouldn't that kind of be a little scary don't you think? Dangerous situations can happen from the driverless cars. They may think they have gotten everything figured but no one truly will.
I'm really against the driverless cars because I just believe that something is just going to go wrong with the car. With all the sensors having to be used. "The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel?" What's it's purpose? Humans have the reason to drive and learn on how to drive so, what's the point to take it away? Driverless cars are just something else in this world people are trying to make up for the "furture" and to get BIG money off of people. Against driverless cars is the smarter way to go these cars have the control and with all the control of a car you'll never know what's it about to do. Car accindentscould possible go up from the driverless cars. Theirs already to many people dying in this world there doesn't need to be anymore from the driverless cars. | 4 |
8a6ba9e | Driverless cars are a great idea for the reason, that they can drive them self and leave less room for error. They can also can alert the driver that they need to take over the driver for the can't drive though cretin areas. The car could save lifes too in the matter that less and less car crash will happen. These car could change the way humans live forever.
The fact that these cars could drive them selves with sensors and watch the places by the car that could usely not be seen by a human driver. The driver less cars could also talk and coranate with each of the other driver less car around them so they could know when and where they are truning witch in trun could drop the car accient rate. As our technology get more and more advanced we could includ a total move away form human drivers and all AI, AI are almost always smater than humans and can be updataed via the internet on traffic probles and other things in the area.
Even if we cant some make the car totaly driverless we could make it mostly driver less and when it is needed we could keep the driver up to date on all the traffic in the area. But if a driver wanted to drive the car him or her self we could just make a button that switches the control over to one and other. If a car crush ever did happen it would be almost always a human driving, but with the power of senors could mimize the threat of something like that ever happening.
The driver less car could also save live in the matter that they have a better reation time the humans. When it would take a human five to six seconds to resopnd to some on walking out in front of them it would take the AI one to two seconds to respond to the danger. Less car crushes means less pople will die hunders of people die every year for cars crushing into each other and the oddes are that the AI could talk to each other and see where and when to trun into or on somthing.
Even though people could stil get hurt with the driver less car it would be minmized to a few people each year. Sometimes a human could have to take over the car witch could be bad or good. Technology does sometimes fail like humans do but its less likly to happen. These car could change the way human live forever. | 3 |
8a6e42b | The author supports his main idea very clear on why studying Venus is worth it despite the dangers it presents. The author develops his claim through facts from NASA and facts about Venus. The writer of the story supports it by saying it will gain human curiosity, Venus once has been like Earth, and how electronic devices can melt due to Venus weather.
First, the author supports the idea of exploring Venus because Venus once been like Earth. In paragraph 4 it states, " Astronmers are fascinates by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth- like planet in our solar system". Another example from paragraph 4 is, " Long ago, Venus was probaly covered largely with oceans and coul have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.". This illustrates how the author supports the idea of studying Venus because it can show how Venus was once like Earth and to astronomers see what happen to those features. It can show them how Earth was like a long time ago.
In addition, the author supports his idea by telling the readers that it can gain human curiosity. In paragraph 8 the author states, " Striving to meet the challenge presentrd by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors". Another example from paragraph 4 is "...doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation". These examples illustrate how the author supports his idea by saying that exploration to Venus can cause human to wonder how Venus was like. And to see the challenges Venus has despite the dangers that it comes with.
Lastly, the author talks about how Venus weather is like. He tells the readers that it's a very harsh weather. In paragraph 7 the author states, " NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions". Another example from paragraph 7 is," Just imagine exposing a cell phone or tablet to acid or heat capable of melting tin". This implifies to the authors support by stating that astrnomers should see what causes that weather and how they can study Venus in a safely matter.
In conclusion, the author supports his idea in various ways. The authors tells the reader how Venus is as its own character. The authors tells the dangers of Venus . The writer showed his support by human curiosity, how Venus climate was, and how it was once made like Earth. | 4 |
8a7446c | There has been a lot of debate circling wether or not the infamous "Face on Mars" is an actual alien made structure of a face or just a natural landform. In my professional opinion its safe for me to assume it is just a natural landform.
Although it resembled a face in the first picture it doesn't necesarrily mean it was created by life forms to look like a face. The only features you can make out on the so-called "Face" are deep holes for eyes, a pointed part for the nose, and a line for the mouth. It doesn't have any distinct features. If if was made my martians they most likely wouldn't want a monument of a human's face so what is it supposed to be? I'll you what it is butte or mesa, a natural landform that is common on Earth.
Another reason you know it isn't a face is the camera quality of the first image. The camera quality in 1976 wasn't as advanved as today's technology is. The pictures in both 1998 and 2001 were both much more clear than the original photograph. Although you can make out somewhat of a face it doesn't mean thats what it was. It could have just been a blurry picture.
Conspriacy theorists say it actually was aliens and they made the face but NASA would greatly benefit from finding actual life on Mars. If NASA found legitimate alien lifeforms it could benefit the whole world. If they were non-hostile they could teach us how to make and use their technology. We could learn a lot from them, like why the landforms on their planet resemble faces. NASA has been trying to find alien life for years, if they found it they woudln't deny them and say they don't exist.
There are a lot of people that think it has to be a face. And the pictures are from 25 years apart, so anything could have happened to the landform in that long. Natural wear and tear could have washed across the surface of it and rendered it a natural landform. In all seriousness they could be right but it would take a lot more than 25 years to ruin solid rock.
The "Face on Mars" had a good 25 year run. It was mostly scaring people and giving conspiracy theorists ammunition to shoot at the government to try to get us to admit there is other life out there, but its time to face reality. It is not a face. It really is a landform. If there was life on Mars you could see it with the cameras we have today, but sadly, no such luck. It's not a face on Mars, we just have imaginations that run wild with wonder. | 5 |
8a76b69 | Venus is a marvelous planet. The Evening Star is very dangerous however, the planet is inhabited by a high amount of sulfiric acid. In the article, it supports the idea that studyig Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by being Earth's twin, supporting the idea that there was once live inhabitants, and that humans don't really know what is on Venus.
There are many planets in our galaxy however Venus seems to proportionally the same as planet Earth. According to "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too" (paragraph 2). This quote exemplifies that Venus is very similar to Earth relating to size. Venus is very dangerous however, that does not stop human beings from wanting to explore the planet. Scientists are also interested in Venus from the close resemblance of Earth. According to the article, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" (paragraph 4). On Venus, there is evidence of rocky sediments as well as features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. This suggests that Venus was once a planet just like Earth until something happened to destroy the chances of being able to inhabit that area.
With Venus being a "sister planet", that brings the question of was there actual life on Venus? As stated in the article, "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life..." (paragraph 4). This quote essentially states that the "Evening Star" holds many forms of evidence that suggests Venus could have inhabited many forms of living species. As well as theorizing, there is actually concrete evidence that life may have inhabited the planet. The article states that, "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment ad includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters" (paragraph 4). The quote shows the concrete evidence that is needed to say that humans or other species of living creatures could have inhabited the planet at a point in time.
Despite the dangers on Venus, the planet has sparked some curiosity. As stated in the article, "...peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions..." (paragraph 6). Venus has very dangerous features of "protection" all throughout the planet. This prohibits, at this point in time, for humans or land rovers to go to the surface of Venus. Although it being a severe risk of getting a closer look, NASA has been developing several tactics to get closer to the surface. In the article it states that, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Vens would allow scientist to float above the fray" (paragraph 5). The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has been working on better ways to get closer to the surface of Venus without the metal melting.
In conclusion, Venus that has been a place that has a curiosity of discovery for many years. In the article, it supports that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by being Earth's twin, supporting the idea there was once live inhabitants, and that humas don't really know what is on Venus. | 4 |
8a77302 | Yes this would be a great tool for the classroom. Because what if somebody is actually down but they are fake smiling? Students could be fake smiling and actually be derpressed and we won't know it. What if there is something wrong with the student. We could ask or help out the student and hopefully help them out. We do not know how the other student feels we can not tell if something is wrong if we just look at them. In the passage it says " For instancem you can probably tell how friend is feeling simply by the look on her face. Of course, most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried ect." This technology that we had come upon can calculate every muscle in your face. 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. The tool can tell if your not smiling enough or what expression you have on your face. | 2 |
8a7edd9 | In my opinion the use of Facisl Action Coding System is not valuable on a classroom because that is something dumb to do or have in a classroom.
A teacher can tell when a student is boring or when he is not paying attention the student might feel embarrased if he gets to take that test becuase, it will be in front of everyone, I think having that in a classroom will be useless but maybe for some students it will be cool getting their faces read by a computer program.
The story in paragraph 8 says "faces don't lie" and that is true we can fake a smile but not everyday, when we're tired we can't fake that we're not tired our eyes will be slow and we are not wide awake, when we're mad people easly notice it but what im trying to say is that having this technology to read the facial expressions of students in a classroom is really unessesary because our faces don't lie and it will be cool not going to lie but i don't really see the benefits of doing that, is worthless we wont be getting to know or learn from it but students will probably had fun with it and having fun is good in class beacause we get to take a break from school work. | 2 |
8a844ca | There is a challenge to explore Venus but they are willing to take risks just to be able to study Venus. One thing that says that Venus could've been like Earth long time ago. Scientists are seeking to conduct a through mission to be able to understand Venus. Would need to get up close and personal depsite the risks. Venus reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study.
The other thing that's more challenging for them are the clouds of highly corrosice sulfuric acid. That atmospheres the surface of the planet of 800 degrees F. The atmosphere pressure is 90 times greater than Earth. Hottest surface tempeture of any planet. Which is why its a impossible thing to do its like a harm for humans we wouldn't be able to take that pressure on us we could just die not even stepping a foot and wouldn't be able to come bcak either.
Not a singler spaceship has tounched down on venus in more than three decades . Thats long and we are trying to see how they did it and we want to be able to make it again. They are trying to see if its possible again because maybe if something ends up happening to Earth and we can be able to survive in Venus we would be going out there and just start all over again.
They say Venus was like another Earth it had mountains and even other stuff but we aren't to sure thats why they are trying to land on Venus to see if it was true. Study more the planet its not going to be easy nothing really can't be impossblie either. They think that maybe it can even cause erupting valcanoes and powerful earthquakes even some frequent lighing.
Electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating and the Chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such condition. Venus would also be a intersesting place to study for like did they really have mountains and rivers almost like another Earth like it. We just have to wait and see if it did and only reseach would show if one day we are able to land on Venus and nothing to go wrong then we will find out if it was just like earth. | 3 |
8a88121 | Why is venus worth pursuiting. Well venus is worth putsuiting because you would be able to gain ifotmation like samples of rocks, samples of gases or anything else. venus used to have water like earth, and scientists would like to know what happen to all the water. venus used to be able to support life, but now it can't. venus still has some features of earth, like the rocky sediment that includes valleys, mountains,and craters.
Why is venus so dangers to have human explor it. Well venus tempture is 800 dregees, It 97% covered in carbon dioxide. The atomosphere pressure is 90 time greater than earth and the clouds on venus are highly corrsive sulfric acid.
Why is venus worth putsuiting well if NASA could find a way for hunman to explor it then we could find out new thing about space. like why is it so hot on venus. then have been spacecraft sent to venus but no human was on it for good reason. The space craft didn't last more than a few hours after landing.
They have some ways to explore venus but all of them have failed but venus is worth pursit if they can find away to get it. they will find away because human curiosty will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endavors. | 2 |
8a90194 | The modern car is a major travel source in which millions of people rely on daily. The issue with this is the struggle of being stopped at lights or being in a traffic jam. The quintessential point here is that greenhouse gases will be lowered in mass amounts if we limit our car usage. Varying countries are supportive of having car free environments/areas. Some being Germany, France, Columbia, and the U.S.
Elisabeth Rosenthal describes a community in Germany. Each owner of a house in the neighborhood is allowed to own a car but has to pay a fee of $40,000 to receive a spot. In this neighborhood of Vauban, there is no need for a car because stores are located next to the neighborhood which is "Placed a walk away" and is very efficient. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse emmisions in Europe..." Vauban is in an attempt to lower these numbers because the thought of owning a car here is "frowned upon" because all essential stores are in walking distance.
The city of Paris was suffering from a smog epidemic and had to enforce a no driving ban. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog..." The French people that were usually driving were not here, so roads and major highways freed up which allows for more free room. The smog also was depleting due to a decrease of car usage.
Columbia is using a yearly plan for a car-free day which brings open streets to the city of Bogota. The advantage of this limited car usage is the promotion of alternate transportation and reduction of smog. "It's a good opppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza in Source three. When it comes to mind, driving can make a day more stressful which hinders work performance. The outstanding responces from this event brought "Two other Colombian cities, Cali and Valledupar..." into the event. "Parks and sport centers also have bloomed throughout the city..." The community of Bogota took a chance to bring their lives closer by incorporating new businesses into a walkable distance from neighborhoods.
According to research, "Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licences as each year goes by..." this also provides less Greenhouse gas effects on the environment. A main factor in reducing traffic jams/greenhouse gases is the new plans that bring hope to those who are skeptical about switching over to car-free. "New york's new bike-sharing program and its skyrocketing bridge and tunnel tolls..." Biking is an excellent alternative to driving because it is fast and efficient. Another plan was provided by the Moblie World Congress, "Barcelona, Spain, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, laid out a business plan for a world in which personal vehicle ownership is impractical..." As stated, big motor vehicle companies are trying to reduce the practicality of owning a car as soociety turns its head towards a car-free environment.
Cars are a very fast port of transportation but carry a burden of bad factors. Pollution has increased over the times in which cars have been overused and is the leading cause for an increase in Greenhouse gases. If we limit our car usage, we can create an almost free pollution zone and free up much needed space for other activites than miles upon miles of driving roads. | 5 |
8a932e3 | "You can live in your car, but you can't drive your house." This is a quote my teacher used to tell me as advise for the future. This was a way of saving money if you had to choose between paying rent or paying your car bills if you were in this situation. However, what he did not realize is its more useful to use less of your car.
Using less of your car improves the enviroment. Using less will reduce the pollution in the air that we breathe in. When we reduce our car use we reduce the amount of resources like fossil fuels and nonreuseable resources. When we use cars and create pollution we also create a smog, but when we stop using cars we can clear the smog. In paris, they banned car use for a certain amount of time and it reduced the amount of smog. In fact, in the article
Paris Bans Driving Due to Smog , it says "The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday."
Another thing that reduces is your payments for your car. How can you pay for a car if you don't have one? The answer is you don't. Without a car you don't have to pay car payments or repair payments. You also don't have to worry about getting fines or looking for parking spaces. In the article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars , it reads "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park- large garages at the edge of the develpment, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home."
If you are not already worried with you car payments, you would be worried about your children's safety. Accidents happen all the time from cars. And if you're not in an accident you could be the one with a car breakdown on your way to work. Now you may say, I need a car because I have to drive to work or drop my kids at school. Than here is a solution, in the article
The End of Car Culture it says, "Likewise the rise in cellphones and car-pooling apps has fascilitated more flexible commuting arrangements, including the evolution of shared van services for getting to work."
My teacher's quote about paying for cars is more useful than paying rent is incorrect. Using less of your car is an advantage to improving the environment, spending less money, and increasing safety in the world. | 4 |
8a950d3 | Being a Seagoing Cowboy is awesome. When your over sea, you can do all kinds of stuff. You can feed the horses, clean the stalls, and when all the horses are dropped off you can have some fun. Basicly, you can anything you want. I think you should become a Seagoing Cowboy.
When the horses are around it's a pretty easy job. All you have to do is feed them, water them, and clean the stalls. Simple. You feed the horses hay and oats. Give them fresh water and clear their stalls every 1 or 2 weeks. It's a pretty easy job if you grew up on a farm.
Being on a boat, we have to make stops along the way. That is when you can go sight-seeing. On our last trip we were going to Greese, we stopped at Venice, Italy. I saw all kinds of cool stuff. I took a grandola ride down the streets of water.
But when all the work is done, and we are all on our way back to America, that is when the fun begins. The other cowboys and I do all kinds of stuff. We play baseball, table tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games to pass time. Sometimes we even play volleyball in the empty horse stalls. Its a lot of fun being a Seagoing Cowboy.
With big orders for horses it might be hard but there are some small orders which are real easy. All in all, it is a fun job. Sometimes the trip is long, somtimes the trip is short but it is still the greatest job in the world. I think no job could be any better. You should come and join to be a Seagoing Cowboy. | 3 |
8a97609 | In the aticle "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author talkes about how this new technology made can detect the emotions a human face is making. The technology can also detect famous faces painted like the mona lisa to detect if she was actually smiling or not. The technology seems great and all but would it be usefull in classroom enviornment?
The technology is still new and being devoloped more and more. The inventors that created it think it would be useful in the classroom to tell when a kid is confused or bored. I for one wouldnt want a camera watching me all class to tell if I am bored or confused. I would rather go and ask a teacher a question if I was confused, instead of being asked if I was confused since the technology might not detect facial features correctly.
In the sventh paragraph the author states, " Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile.", If a regular PC at home wouldnt not be able to hand this software how would a school be able to afford such high tech software for all of its classrooms. The school could in turn spend money on things that matter more instead of trying to detect facial expressions of students.
In conclusion, I think this software has its ways to go to become ready to come into schools, once in becomes less expenisve and it can run on regular school computer. I find this technology intruiging but I do not find it right for a school enviornment. I do however find it interesting to use to find out when people are lying or use it to detect facial features of people that are maybe in trouble but can't say it in a kidnapping type of situation. | 3 |
8a9d35f | Are Driverless cars safe for the future?
In the Article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", it talks about how driverless cars is not an imagination for the future but how it's coming to a reality and how the idea is coming together. Even the company Google has starteed having cars that drive independently since 2009. But in my opinion, I believe that driverless cars are unsafe and that car companys should stick to manually driven vehicles.
There are reasons that driverless cars are unsafe; they can't drive around complicated trafics issues and navigate through road work, and still need assistance of a human to navigate and drive the car, and repairing the roads to be suitable for these vehicles is costly. How can a car navigate around traffic and know what to do in the situation? The car doesn't have capability of a human mind to work through these problems. In paragraph 7 in the article it staes, " But all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating work zones and arund accidents." This proves that these vehicles don't have the capability of human skills and problem solving skills to work around these obstacles.
Another problem with driverless cars is that there still needs to be a human driver on the wheel and to be alert at all times. There is no point on having driverless cars if the car can't succesfully drive itself without a human. These vehicles are still not equiped and aren't safe for the pasangers becuase the driver needs to be alert at all times and wouldn't it get boring not driving but just watching? Dr. Werner Huber, a BMW project manager driver says, " The drive psychological aspects of automation are really a challenge." If it's really that much of a challenge then it most likely will be impossible to fix this problem.
Lastly, another big downside of driverless cars is repairing the roads to a smart road system to accompany the drivrless cars. These smarter roads will make the cars safer and easier for the cars to navigate throught but it will be costly and every road would have to be repaired. In paragragph 3, Enigeers at Berkley stated, " These smart-road systems worked suprisungly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." This statement shows that these engineers are agreeing that is impossible to rebuild every road to accompany these vehicles for a safe ride.
Driverless cars was an imagination of the past but has started becoming a relaity in our furture. But these cars should stay an imagination and have been proven to not be safe. Driverless cars still need a driver in the seat to take control in complicated siuations and it's too costly. Why have "driverless cars" when you still need a driver? | 4 |
8a9d6ce | There are many reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboy. The first reason is that you get to adventure and sight see. I know this because I got to explore an excavated castle and the Panama Canal on my way to china. I also road a gondola in the Venice, Italy streets of water. We also had to go to Greece with a load of 335 horeses plus the food and i got to see the Acropolis. I also got to play baseball and vollyball with other cowboys when they returned to give the animals back.
Another reason you should join the Seagoing Cowboys is that you get to help countries that are in ruins from World War 2. I had to help recover food supplies, bring back animals, an help repair. Even on the ship you have to take care of animals, such as horses, young cows, and mules that were shiped over seas. You had to feed them, give them water, and clean the stalls.
Sometimes you have to serve as a nightwatch, I did. I had to check the animals every night and make shure they were ok. I did make a mistake and slid down a slipery ladder and cracked my ribs but that was my fualt.
I would suggest anyone who loves adventureing with a friend and has always wanted to go on a adventure some where but couldn't. Or if you just like helping people, and animals recover from the war. This is the program for you, join the seagoing cowboys today! | 3 |
8a9e3a3 | Electoral college is a dictator, boss, or lottery! It's unfair. It is the duty and privledge of the people to select our government leader. We should choose based on our point of view. The second source conveys effective points to consider, such as, directly voting for the president and the disaster factor. It also informs us that, even though unlikely, there is possibility of a tie.
Directly voting for a president is an issue addressed in both source 2 and 3. They agree that technically, we're not really voting for a president. The second source tells us that when we vote, it is actually sent to the state elector, and it is they (electors) who vote for the president. Over 60 percent of voters would prefer voting directly over our system now. Even though source 3 gives us reasons to keep the electoral college, it will support us when we say we aren't actually voting for the president directly.
Source 2 gives us the "single best argument" against the elector college as what it refers to as the disaster factor. It uses the fiasco of 2000, the biggest election crisis in a century, as an example of why we are so lucky. The state legislatures were technically responsible for picking elctors and they didn't always have to listen or acknowledge the people's opinion/vote. It takes us further back by giving an example of segregationists back in 1960 where John F. Kennedy almost lost the popular vote of Louisiana when their legislature replaced Democratic electors with new ones that opposed him (Kennedy). What source 2 calls "faithless" electors, electors who dont believe that their candidate will win; hence faithless, have occasionly voted in favor of their choice, disregarding the decision of the people.
The third source gives us five reasons in favor of the electoral college method. Even though we don't directly vote, the party chooses the elctors and trust that they will select the voted nominee, and it ensures us that the trust is almost never decieved. Disputes over the outcome because of an Electoral College Vote is possible, but not as likely as the popular vote. The next reason given informs us that a region doesnt have enough electoral votes to win the election for the president they favor. "Swing States" is another reason. It refers to states that can be persuaded and aren't neccesarily entitled to a particular candidate, so they will really pay attention to what the cadidates have to say, their campaign. "Big states" is the fourth reason and is focused on population advatages. Meaning, a state with smaller population will have just as much impact on the election as one with a larger population, its equal. It is not neccessarily a good thing when the last reason says "The Electoral College avoids the problem of elctions in which no candidate recieves a majority of the votes cast". Wouldn't that raise the risk of a tie? Though, it is extremely unlikely that a single vote may decide the president and voters in these elections want to express their opinion and prefernece.
I am in favor of abolishment of the unfair, old-fashioned, and irrational electoral college method. Plus, reasons to keep this system arent as strong and factual as the reasons to abolish it. | 4 |
8a9effe | Cars are going out of style. In Vauban, Germany, cars are not owned, save the occasional one that can be afforded; Paris,France banned certain cars from driving certain days; Bogota, Columbia has a car-free day; and America is seeing a decrease in their car sales. The reason behind it: smog and greenhouse gas emmissions. The reduction of car use has helped these things immensely in more ways than one.
"Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emmissions in Europe...and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States," says experts in Elisabeth Rosenthal's
"In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars."
Europe, the United States and other places are starting a movement called "smart planning." It is a plan to seperate suburban life from auto useage. There has been efforts these past two decades to make cities better suited for walking. In Vauban, 70 percent of families do not even own cars, they walk everywhere. It is similar in Bogota, where the people ride bikes and hike to work whether it is in the shining sun or in the downpour of rain. Even here in America, driving has decreased. In 2013, studies show that the numbers of miles driven was nearly equal to the numbers from 1995. The percentage of people under the age of 40 getting their license has dropped 23 percent between the years 2001 and 2009 according to Rosenthal's article
"The End of Car Culture."
Last year, Paris had to enforce a ban to clear the smog from the city; many people got fined for ignoring it. Five days after enacting the ban, congestion went down 60 percent. In Bogota, less streets were being built while more and more sidewalks and bicycle paths (118 miles worth) were under construction. President Barak Obama has made plans to cease the greenhouse emmissions and, with the recent changes in transportation use, his plans could work. As stated in Rosenthal's first article "The Environmental Protection Agency is promoting 'car reduced' communities and legislators are starting to act." It is predicted that public transportation will become much more popular in the next few years.
Cars have polluted so many areas of our world and at this point of time, our world is changing. Less car useage means more money that is not being spent on gas and less pollution to our environment. The executive chairman of Ford Motor Company has a business plan to create cities where "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." It is beneficial to our new world that it stays intact for the future generations to come. | 3 |
8aa2a83 | I think this kind of technology could be useful in a classroom. Most days, kids feel bored or tired just sitting in a class listening to a teacher talk. If we had this technology, kids could get more free time playing on the computer and when the computer notices boredom, then it could make the lesson more fun. If it can help kids learn, then it might be a good investment.
I am for the new technology. If computers could tell someones emotions, I would use it to explain my emotions. I could figure out what is wrong with my friends if they weren't acting normal. I think it is amazing.
To conclude, I think it would be cool to have this kind of technology. For computers to have technology like that, is mindblowing. We could use it to see how other feel about certain things. Like if you want to computer to learn fear, put someone that is scared of scary movies in a dark room and play scary movies until they get scared. Then have the computer scan them and see how it works. You could do this with any emotion. I like this technology. I think it is a good and practical investment. | 2 |
8aa59a6 | The electoral college was a great attempt to give a reliable system of selecting the president, but it just does not work the way our founding fathers wanted it to. Many people throughout the country have brought this up as a major issue because they also agree. The other option that people would prefer to have would be selecting the president by the popular vote, which is the smarter path. This method is more democratic, it has a smaller chance of producing unreliable results, and it encourages voters to still vote in states where there is already a predominant political party.
The electoral college is not democratic. The method of selecting people for it is generally controlled by each candidate's political party, and their responsibilities vary based on the party's wants. The people who select the candidates for the electoral college are not part of the popular population; they are part of a political party. Next, when people go to vote for the president, they are not voting for the president, but actually voting for a slate of electors that in their turn vote for the president. And to take this to the next step, as shown in "What Is the Electoral College?", "Most states have a winner-takes-all system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate." If voters vote for the candidate that ends up losing, poof, all their votes are given to the other team. To atleast make this a little more fair, instead of voting for the president, voters should cast votes for the electoral college members that are choosing their president. That way, you can at least do research on the people whom you are really voting for and make the best decision possible.
The popular vote is the most reliable way to get results from the people. It is the most raw, unbreakable way of selecting the highest political figure of the country. On the other hand, the electoral college's slight stretches have the possibility of unreliable results. In "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong", it becomes known that "...thanks to the quirks of the electoral college - [Al Gore] won the popular vote but lost the presidency". It is still argued that the electoral members chosen are extremely trustworthy :"each party selects a state of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee (and that trust is rarely betrayed)" (from "In defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President"). However, even in the continuation of the fragment above, even Richard A. Posner (,the author,) admits "[;however,] it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national vote." The electoral college members are trusted to vote for whom they were voted for, but their job is to be a highly knowledgeable political expert; and if they see the other president as a better choice, then it can become very unfair.
The electoral college discourages people to vote in countries where there is already a dominating party. For example, California is mostly a democratic country that usually casts a (highly populated) vote for the democratic party's electoral candidates. So why should republicans consider voting in this area? The government has always tried to push out that "every vote counts", but is this really the case? Another good point of this is explained by Bradford Plumer again in "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best laid defenses of the system are wrong" : "Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races of 'swing' states. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina..." Swing states, as the're called, are the places where presidential candidates always hang around. They barely bother with the other states because they know they have already got or lost the vote in them...
Some laws were brilliantly passed, but had to eventually be deconstructed due to present implications. The electoral college is not democratic, doesn't produce reliale results, and discourages voters. It is time that we abolish this college just at we overturned the eighteenth amendment before. | 5 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.