essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
8f8a629 | The "technolgy to read students" is a great idea because, it could help many students and teachers know when it is time to stop and when it is time to begin. Some students can't focus has long has other students can.
"Technology to read students" knows when a student is bored. This is great because, if a student is bored during a lesson then you know the lesson isn't helping them. It will also help teacher out to pick a diffrent assignment or move on to something else. If the assignments are boring it looks bad on students and also the teacher, because nobody is getting work done. So technoly that reads students would help out big time.
If technology knows when you are mad, or frustrated the computer would know that and the computer would alert the teacher then, the teacher would know you were probably frustrated because you were struggling. Say a student was scared or nervous to ask the teacher for help, the teacher would get the alert from the computer saying the student is frustrated.
Last, technology will tell you if the student is happy. This will help because, if students are happy with an assignment that means they are getting it and they know what they're doing. The teacher will get an alert saying students are haptpy then that means they are enjoying the assignment or lesson. If everyone is happy it looks good on students and teachers.
"Technology reads students" is a great idea because, it would help so many people out in school. It would lead to better test scores. More money for teachers. If technology coud read students, it would be a great source! | 3 |
8f91685 | To me the object does look like a face. But to me it also looks like a bunch of rocks put together and the about to break apart. Also the face is a natural landform that probably was built by water and and dirt. That formed over the year and got so hard that now its starting to crack and form a object that looks like a face.
In the article it says "twenty five years ago something funny happened around Mars". So that makes me think that rocks or dirt builded up and now starting the crack. On Mars there' s a bunch of rock and dirt. But also the article said "A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see". "The caption noted a "huge rock formatoin which resembles a human head".
My conclusion is that somebody will find out what it is. But also find out the cause of it and what harm can it do. Not only that but whatg do it stand for and why is it just now happening after all these years that has passed by. But this is my conclusion for this article here today. | 2 |
8f938f1 | Hello fellow drivers, you have probably already heard about how driving less could make the air polution from being so bad. Well its true it is a fact that has finial got the research to prove that it would help the greenhouse emmsions from being so bad.
In Vauban Germany residents of an upper class community have done away with ninety precent of car driving, having only two places to park on the outskirts of the community. This has proven that by elimatating most car useage it makes people happier and less stressed out and helps provent the poplution that is cause by cars. "I'm much happier this way", said Hiedrun Walter a resident off this lavish community.
When you hear the word Smug what are your first reactions? It is this nasty poluted air that has trapped car emissions leaving a blaket of greyish air this is caused by "cold nights and warm days. It is not good at all. when this happened in paris they banned cars from driving on certian days. "If you have a lisense plate with an even number then you are not aloud to drive on mondays, Or if it is odd numbers then you are not aloud to drive on tuesday". Until the smug has gone away.
In Bogota, Colombia a peogram that has been going around made its deput there for the first time. The program bans all use of cars excludeing taxis and buses, " millions of columbians could have been saw walking or biking or hiking all around columbia". They also got to other cities to join in and participate in this event.
In the past few years in america the car driving avrage driving rate has droppped back to the rate it was in 1995 this is a complete shocker they believe we have hit the peak of driveing and it is dweendling very rapidally. Tis they believe was because of the recession and that people are just not as intrested in getting there lisense like they once where. "the number of miles driven in the united staes peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily there after"
In all this i hope you decide to make the right desision and choces to save the planet. | 2 |
8f99561 | Why the face on Mars is just a Natural land form. 1976, Mars Global surveyer took an image on mars and it looked like shadowy likeness of a human face. So you can say that, but i think your wrong. The Jet Propulsion Lab when the face appeared on their monitors it was short lived, and scientists think it was just another Martian esa.
Nasa says that it was probably a Lava dome that maybe made it look like a face. Scientists kept telling people that it was just Martian Mesa. In April 5th 1998, Micheal Malihn and his Mars Orbiter camera team snap the human like face 10 times to see if they could get another good look at the face. Thousand of web surfers were waiting for the picture could be on the jpl site. Then they had revealed that is was just a regular artifact.
It couldnt have been an created by aliens. Scientist said it was just the shadow giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. Authors thought it would be a good way to to engage public and attract attention to Mars. And Mars got its Attention?
The face on mars had basically become something that everyone was talking about. It had appeared in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, radio talk shows, and magazines. It had Haunted the Checkout lines of grocery stores for years. So They tried it again.
April 8, 2001 it was a cloudy day in Cydonia. Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution, and it still didnt work. The information a gave shows you that the human face figure was not true. Overall it had to have been a Lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. | 3 |
8f9adaf | Have you ever thought that there are aliens in space?
Many people believe that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. The Face on Mars was not created by aliens due to it's common landform shade.
Mars Global Surveyor was used to take pictures of Mars. The picture showed the Face was the equivalent to the size of a butte or mesa. Butte or mesas are common landforms around the American West. A famous one is the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
Martain mesas are very common around Cydonia. Cydonia is a region of Mars. It is not uncommon for a rock formation to resemble something like a face. The shadows on Cydonia gave the illusion of eyes, nose and a mouth on the natural rock formation.
People who support that the Face was created by aliens believe that there is life on Mars and that NASA is hiding this information. This is not true. NASA wishes that there was an ancient civilization on Mars. Life on Mars would be great business for NASA and they would have no reason to hide it from the public.
The first picture of the Face was taken in 1976. Eighteen years later, Mars Global Surveyor landed on the Red Planet. The technonlogy was way more advanced now. The NASA scientists were able to get a picture ten times sharper that the orginal Viking photo. This proved to the thousands of waiting web sufers that the Face was a natural landform.
The Face is a natural landform. Scientists at NASA have spent years finding evidence to prove that the Face is a natural landform. As of 2001, the Face was proven to be a natural landform and that there are no aliens on Mars. | 3 |
8fa257f | The Challengen of Exploring Venus," The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presemts.
The author supports this idea. That Venus is actually a planet. in our solar system, Venus is the second planet from our sun. While Venus is simple to see from the challenging place to examine more closely. Often referred to as Earth's twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in term of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too. Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planetary neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds. These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's perputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us.
A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything human encounter on Earth; such an eveironment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals.
If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface? Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar sytem. 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 feartures that are analogous to those on Earth The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features sych as valleys mountains, and creaters. Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit,a crucial consideration given the long time farmes of space travel. The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the optionsfor making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particulry compelling ideafor sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fary. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. at thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperature would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth.
Striving to meet the Challenge presented by Venushas 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. our tarvels 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. | 1 |
8fa4a0d | They caluclate Mona Lisa emotional they said that she has 83 percent of happyness, 9 percent of disgusted, 6 percent of fearful and 2 percent angry. The computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscels in the model must move like human muscles then Dr. Hung relies on the work of psychologists such as Dr. Paul Eckman creator of FACS ( facial action coding system).
For example your frontails parslterails muscle ( above your eye) raises your eyebrows when you're suprised; your orbicularis oris ( around your mouth) tightens your lips to show anger. In a classroom computer could recognize when student is becoming confused or bored at the same time technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive for video games or video surgery.
When feeling down look in the mirror and do these falling steps 1. rasie your lips at the corners of your mouth. 2. then squit your eyes slightly to prduce wrinkling ( crow's feet) at the corners of your eyes. 3. holding that rasie the outer parts of your cheeks up toward your eyes that you smiling as a reowned drama coach constantin stanislvsky had his actors carefully reproduce smiling and frowning as a way of creating these emtions on stage and watching your loves one die will make you cry its the same way watching a movie of someone dieing. | 1 |
8fa86e4 | Driverless cars are a new and unique thing that has been dreamed about since the inception of the automobile itself, no longer is there the human error in driving. I for one, strongly support driverless cars. There are many reasons why there should be an allowance for driveless cars, but there are also some disadvantages.
With driveless cars, the room for human error is completely removed, we are not a precise as a computer with radar, sensors, other digital devices. We as humans can become distracted and unfocused when driving, but driveless cars cannot, greatly reducing the number of accidents.
Also, Google Car has been on the road since 2009 and has not had a single accident. Whereas there are hundreds of wrecks, accidents, and casulties due to human error. There are of course the posibility of glitches, malfuctions, and other bugs that may affect the system, but when propperly ironed out and taken care of by the manufacturers, it should provide a much safer expierience on the road.
Another reason is that all "driverless" cars still need a drive to some degree. This could be seen either as good or bad. I personally see it as good. You do not have robot cars rolling around the street with no supervision or abillity to override in case of a malfucntion in the computer controlling the vehicle. All the person in the vehicle needs to do is take over the wheel drive how we are currently.
Driveless cars are part of the continuing and growing field of technology where there is rapid progress and advancements. It is part of an everchanging field that is full of constant innovations and changes. If a driveless car is not precise enough to drive through construction zones or the scene of an accident, it will be able to eventually due to how quickly technology evolves and builds upon itself. It will continue to expand in both predicable advancements and those we wouldn't have thought of.
While there is some concern over whether we should allow driverless cars, I myself fully support them and their development for a number of reasons, such as the removal of human error, lack of accidents, requirement of a driver, and constant evolution. I believe that it is only a matter of time until what was considered fiction in the past becomes a reality in the future. | 4 |
8fa96ed | Against the developing of driverless cars. Driverless cars will we a dangerous hazard, they require a lot of sensors, a ready driver, specific conditions and waiting on the law.
Driveless cars require a lot of sensors without any sensors the cars would not be able to go forward, backwards, applying breaks, reducing power from the engine or drive themselves because the sensors are what keeps them from crashing into other vehicles.
Driverless cars need a read driver at a times. The vehicle can handle driving functions at speed up to 25 miles per hour, but require a driver to keep a hold of the steering wheel. These cars will give you signal telling you it is time to take over the steering wheel becasue the road conditions, construction site or an accident is happening or occured ahead.
When the car is driving itself it needs to have specific road or navigation conditions. If there has been an accident, a construction site or traffic the car might signal you to take over the wheel and let you drive instead because it can't drive itself through these conditions. This mean that the driver has to be alert and ready to take over when the situation requires.
There are traffics laws stating that only a safe car has a human driver in control at all times. And as a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars. So far California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia have led the country in allowing limited use of semi-autonomous cars.
Driveless cars will be a dangerous hazard because they require a lot of sensors, a ready driver, and specific conditions in order to run properly. | 3 |
8fae37d | The author suggests that studing Venus is a worthy pursuit because Venus has her terrible conditions. He gives several examples. One of the examples is that, on Venus there is a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide that blankets it. To even make it harder. The clouds are highly corrosive with sulfuric acidbin the atmosphere.
The second example is that scientists are still talking abot making a vist there when they know the surface is to dangerous. There are astronomers that are real amazed at Venus because they belive the Venus was once almost like Earth a really long time ago. Venus long ago was probably covered with oceans and could have had various life forms like Earth. Venus till this day has a rocky surface, valleys, mountains and craters like Earth. The value of retuning to Venus seems indisputable.
The last example is that NASA has an idea for sending humans to study Venus. Imagain a blimp-like vehicle that would float above the surface of Venus. It would sit 30 miles above the surface For it being that hogh it would avoid the conditions of Venus but it would still be hot. It would be about 170 degress Farhrenheit, but the air pressure would colse to sea level. It would not be easy conditions but it is survivable for humans. Our travels should not be limited by dangers and doubts but we should expand the very edges of imagination and innocations. | 2 |
8fb2390 | In 1976 something very strange was found by the Viking 1 spacecraft. It appeared to be a face on the surface of the planet Mars. With this discovery NASA scientists took further investigations into what this picture could actually be. The scientists looked at the picture and determined that it was not a face only a mesa that looked like a face because shadows were casted onto it.
NASA realeased this picture to the public saying that this was not a face on Mars only a mesa. This attracted the publics attention and it became a huge pop icon that appeared in books,magazinse,radio talk shows,and even in grocery store isles for Twenty-Five years.
Many conspiracy theorists thought that this could actually be evidence of life on Mars,But if this was true why would NASA not realease it to get a huge government grant to try and develope a way to send people to Mars to explore.
On April 5,1998 Eightteen years after the Viking 1 and 2 were shut down the Mars Orbiter Camera came into orbit range of Mars and started taking pictures. The team of scientists espiecially focused on getting a picture of the face so they could reveal to public that there was indeed no face on Mars. The picture came back alot more clear and showed that there was no face on Mars therefore stating that there was no ancient civilization that NASA was hiding.
On April 8,2001 Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough to take another picture of the face,And this time the scientists angled it perfectly so they had the best possible picture to stop all the non-sense about the face on Mars. They took the picture and enhanced it three times the size. This picture was released to public and it showed that the "Face" was actually a martian equivalent of a mesa.
In conclusion there was no actually face on Mars,And the entire time it was only a landform which there are very many of on the entire planet of Mars. | 4 |
8fb3a5c | Dear Mr. Senator,
The electoral college is a terrible way to vote for the president. It's not fair to the people and there's always the chance of the disaster factor!
First off, the electoral college is unfair to the people. It's like your actual vote doesn't matter, because in reality your just voting for another voter. For example when a president wins the popular vote, it doesn't matter! So the peoples real opinion means nothing. Because the only thing that counts is actually who wins over the electoral college. So who knows how many people there are who voted for the president that lost the electoral college's votes but won the popular how outraged they must be! In article 2 they have a really good point "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational."(p14) Which basically means that to the people the electoral college doesnt make much sense, and there vote doesn't exactly even count. This is only one reason that the electoral college needs to be thrown out!
Second of all, the electoral college always has the chance of the disaster factor. When the states voter doesn't vote for who his is supposed to! Or when the state replaces the voter with someone who will do just that. In article 2 they have a great example "Back in 1960 segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. (So that a popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy.)"(p11) So the disaster factor is always a potential threat which is why the electoral college should be abolished!
To conclude, the electoral college needs to be abolished because there is always the chance of the disaster factor, and it's unfair to the people it's like their vote doesn't even matter! | 3 |
8fba769 | Hi in luke and i want to tell and try to convince you of seagoing when you go out to sea you get to travel the world,go sight seeing ,and do the things you never did before because when I went sight seeing we did lots of stuff like played table-tennis,fencing,boxing ,whittling and lots more of fun stuff u get to travekl all over the world to places like,China, greece, and lots more,but there are some good and bad parts of traveling like there are lots of animals, it takes along time to get there and also there would be lots of dangers.
But there are some imorpartant things like you get to help other countries with their needs because after World War 2 euroupe was left with great disasters like it`s citys where ruined lots of people died and lots of fammilys lot`s their homes and to help these countries to recover. You woyuld help them with their food supply,and animals,But we weren`t alone 44 other nations joined together to form the (The United States Relief and Rehabilitation Administration) and to join the Sea going cow boy you would be doing these countries a huge favor because whaty if we had a Worl War 3
the people would count on you to help them with this. This is opportunity of a lifetime.
And I hope you`ve considerd joining seagoing cowboys. | 2 |
8fbf117 | Venus is called as the "Evening Star" and it is the birghtest point of light in the night sky. However, this nickname is wrong as Venus isactually a planet. In our solar system, it is the second planet from our sun and is the closet to Earth. Therefore, it is a challenging study for human about Venus. Hence, there are some claims and reasons where the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger.
Firstly, scientists are discussing futher visit to Venus's surface because it is the one and only planet that is most Earth-like in our solar system. This is proved in Paragraph 4 where 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. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Futhermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planet visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. In my opinion, we can explore Venus by using technology as it is most similiar planet with Earth. Because of the polution, the Earth will be no longer to be safe and we need to find another place yo live in. Thus, Venus is a good idea where the scientists can work on it to find a way for human to live in there.
Secondly, Venus is a worthy pursuit despite danger because human can actually live in Venus. This is told by the evidence in Paragraph 5 where The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has a possible solition to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as out jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehivle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exeed Earth level. So, Venus has the most likely conditions as we have on Earth. It is a good idea to explore Venus and make it same as Earth for living. Although it has no easy conditions, but it is survivable for humans. Hence, the scientists can work on it to be prepare on the baddest thing that will happened on Earth.
Thirdly, the author says that Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers it presents because the scientists can examine some of the contents on Venus by using
specific old technologies. So, why not we try and see? In Paragraph 7, NASA is working on another way to studying Venus despite maintaining the old way which is not successful. For example, some simplifies 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 prohect is looking back to an old technology called mechanical compuers. These devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and played an important role in 1940s during World War ll. The thought of computers existing in those dyas may sound shocking, but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Modern computers are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions. I can imagine it as a electronic devices to acid of melting tin. Thus, these technologies can help scientists to examine some of the contents in Venus. They do not cost too much as they are old technologies which can be use in this case. Hence, I think that the scientists examine and do some experiment on Venus where it will bring benifits to all of the human being. We must try to expore something new.
In conclusion, I think that Venus is a nice place for human to live in as it has the most Earth-like conditions. So, the scientists work hard for the experiment to know whether it is good or not for us to live in. Sometimes we need to try something new to know new things. I think it is a nice way to examine Venus for preparation to the baddest. | 4 |
8fc1fe9 | I disagree, there should not be andy driverless cars in the future. This is because if there were to be an accident and the car were driverless it were to be on the manufactures and that would mean that the cars were not as safe as it guarenties.
Therefore that would lead to many recless mistakes and companies would lose money which would intintionally lead to not enough funds to fix and make sure that the cars will be safer.
Also, If a car were driverless how would it know the correct and incorrect way to drive without a drivers experience and skill? That would lead to a greater amount of accidents because the car may not know the right way to drive in different countries or cities.
Would the car have to be programmed with all the worlds driving techniques and rules? Not all states and countries have the same laws and road rules, wouldnt the manufactuers have to be able to program all of the worlds rules and techniques to beable to make it safer also? Not all companies will be able to get a hold on all the tech and programing for that so not all of the cars will be able to drive in different places and states because the car would become disfunctional.
Also
there is always the risk of an accident weither the car is driverless or not so therefore the statement of a driverless
car is indeed false advertisement, it is even more false because the driver will not be in control to prevent the accident if one were to happen.
Would it be safer for the enviorment? If driverless cars were to be invented would there be a lot more factories and bussinises opening?
Thata would not be safe for the enviorment because the factories would cause pollution and more trees and forests would have to be torn down in order to creat more bussinises.
Therefore creating a driverless car would be a bad idea at least until it has better and safer ground to be to the attention of the people. | 3 |
8fc5a7f | The Face, made by aliens or just a natural landform? The Face, believe it, is just a natural landform on Mars. Why, the Face, is a natural landform is because, for one we do have images of this landform, the Face is also like a natural landform we have here on earth, and if there was an ancient alien civilization on Mars it would benifit NASA, so why think we're hiding anything? Maybe there was once aliens, but the facts just don't prove that to be true, therefore it is indeed just a natural landform.
We do have many images of the Face. The very first one that was taken in 1976 does indeed look like a face, but over the years wtith new technology it doesn't look like a face anymore. Now you may say that it's because of erosion and blah blah, but it's not. It has always been just a mesa which is very common on Mars, "New high-resolution images and 3D altimetry from NASAs Mars Global Survey spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa." With our better technology it clearly shows that it is indeed not a face, therefore maybe you should stop believing it is.
The Face, is like one of the natural landforms we have here on earth. These natural landforms are natural occuring lava dome that took the form of an isolated mesa and they look about the same as the many that are on Mars. "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesalandforms common around the American West. It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, says Garvin. Thats a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. All in all, Garvin is a real, bona fide scientist, so why not believe him?
If that still didn't convince you then this might. Simply if there was ever life on any other planet in our solar system we, NASA, would highly benifit from it. We would be able to study them and learn everything about them. So why would we hide it? Well we could if they, the aliens, didn't feel very comfortable with us telling everyone about them wanting to go see our leader and what-not. "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Marsevidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." Yes we could be hiding it from you for their sake not ours, so before you think that we're hiding things from you for us think about the aliens too.
Sure maybe we're all wrong and in the end you were right and there were once alien life forms on Mars, but that simply can't be true. The things we have; the images, an example of one here on earth, and the realization that if there were ever life forms on Mars it would benifit NASA and everyone else on Earth. So if you would please take your skeptical specticals off and realize that not everything you think is right is right, because maybe you're wrong. Who knows though there could be aliens out there on Mars hiding or maybe they're watching us as you read this. | 4 |
8fc6d64 | Luke bomberger was a seagoing cowboy in the story- A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves. Luke had some amazing adventures a a seagoing cowboy, he saw and did many things. I am going to show you how neat seagoing can be. The things that are fun about seagoing cowboy activites are the sightseeing, the places you can visit, and serving your country.
As a seagoing cowboy, you can see many different things. You can see buildings like the statue of liberty. You can see different oceans and landscapes like the Atlantic ocean and the rocky mountains. You can see and meet different people like the president of the United States.
You can also visit different places as a seagoing cowboy. You could stop at different restraunts like an Ihop on the edge of the ocean. You could walk in a cand store and walk out with a package of m&m's. Or you can visit some national monuments like Mount Rushmore.
As a seagoing cowboy you can serve your own country. You can tend to different animals like pigs and cows. You can carry supplies like artillery or food. You can transport people and soldiers to where they need to go.
Helping your country, sightseeing, and the places you can visit are all good reasons why you can concider being a seagoing cowboy. You have seen how fun it can be. Think it over, it might just be the job for you. | 2 |
8fc8898 | DEAR Senator my name is luis and I think you should change the election by popular vote for the presiden of the united states because then the people would choose who they like better and it would easyer to vote . the reason why you shouldent agree with the electoral college system is that voters do not vote for the president .but for the slate of electors who in turn elect the president. so the electors can be anyone not holding public office. the state picks on the electors and sometimes state conventions and state partys central committe and the presidental candidates themselves. so what i am saying is that if change to popular vote it willshare the candidate share of the electoral college and invariably eceeds his share of the popular vote. there are five reasons for retaining the electoral college despite its lack of democratic pedigree and all are paractical reasons are not liberal or conservative reasons. | 1 |
8fca85d | Many places in the world, seem to be faceing similar problems; Traffic, pollution, and stress.
Some advantages to limiting the usage of cars; is to reduce stress, help the enviorment, and less traffic jams. In "Car-Free Cities" Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, stated "when i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Also in this new approach people are more accessible to public transportation. The United State's Enviromental Protection Agency has started promoting "car reduced" communities. This is a great benefit to the people and the enviorment.
Congestion in the streets of France seem to be a mayor problem. Also "smog" has occured in the air because of various motor vehicles. In Source Two: "Paris bans driving due to smog" after ordering people with even-numbered license plates to leave their cars at home the congestion of smog and traffic went down by 60 percent. Since cars with certain license plates weren't allowed on the street certain days people were given free public transportation,"public transit was free of charge from Friday to Moday". which has also reduced pollution.
In source three: "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" also demonstartes the positiveaspects of limited car usage. Even buissness man Carlos Arturo Plaza is talking about it, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." Colombia's way to reduce pollution and the smog in the air is by promoting alternative transportation. If people decide to go against the day of no cars in the street, they will be faced with $25 fines. It was such a positive outcome that two more cities other than Bogota decided to join, Cali and Valledupar, joined the event. But throughout time Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asuncion,Paraguay commented "these people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders." This campaign began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. this event has dramatically cut traffic; and new restrants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up.
The advantages of limiting the car usage, helps the enviorment by not causing much pollution to the air, because of the motor vehicles. Causes less stress and tension to people that have a motorized vehicles,also causes less traffic collisions and more space. | 3 |
8fcaf46 | Driverless cars has it's positive and negative aspects, but in my opinion, I do think driverless cars should exist. Although, this world does have many accidents every day with humans driving, a driverless car could actually be more safer. A car itself is usually not the problem in an accident, it's the driver. So if we focused more on the car then the problem could be close to solved. Driverless cars could be very safe, even more safe than the cars now.
Car accidents happen every day, but according to Google, their driverless car has driven more than half a million miles without even crashing one time. Although, being in a car with no human driving could seem scary, it's more safer. Plus, a driverless car truly isn't driverless. There is still a human controlling the car in a a way. When the car is dealing with road work, accidenst or pulling in and out of driveways, that's when the real driver comes in and helps. The car will actually alert the driver.
A public- transport taxi system could be very important to this world. A taxi nowadays uses plenty of gas which is also plenty of money. Driverless cars would use half the fuel of today's taxi. It would even have more flexibility than a bus! Not only are driverless cars more safer, but they even use less money.
A car that only needs a driver 90% of the time, is pretty amazing. Transportation will be much more easier and faster in the future with driverless cars. They are safer, cheaper, and more easier! Although, it seems a long way from the dream of calling a driverless cab to take us wherever we need to go, the dream is actually catching up to reality, according to the founder of the Google Car project. This world grows closer to the new car everyday. Soon, driverless cars could become a reality! | 4 |
8fd287f | In the story, the author talks about why Venus is a plant that NASA would love to study and know more about, but its very difficult to do that with alot of difficulties and challenges to face wanting the ability to know more about the Planet.
In Paragraph 3 the author talks about The planets surface and temperatures. One reason why it would be difficult to land on Venus, is because the temperatures avarage over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the pressure of the atmosphere is 90 times greater than what humans on planet earth ever experienced. The author also states that in his words by saying "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth". Venus also has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in the solar system, meaning our sister planet is one of the hottest plants in our solar system by far.
Another reason why it would be difficult to land on Venus and study the planet, because in past missions no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Thats a good reason why spacecrafts havent landed on Venus to get the ability to study the planet in more than three decades. In Paragraph 3, the author also states that in his words, "A thick atmosphere of almos 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere". The author also says that weather present additional impediments like powerful earthquakes, frequent lightning strikes and erupting volcanoses seeking the land on the surface. | 2 |
8fe06d7 | The author doesn't fully support his idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. He displays too many downsides of the exploration. He frequently brings up how risky it could be. The benefits are acknowledged, but briefly. The author spends too much time focusing on how the conditions are far from easy when he should have been focusing on why traveling to Venus is worth it. His idea is that the trip is worth it, but most of his writing describes why it is not.
The author first brings up the environment of the planet. He describes the hot temperatures, stating how it averages to be over 800 degress Farenheit. He also adds in how it has the hottest surface, despite Mercury being closer to the sun. This is obviously way too hot for human beings. Then, he discusses that the atmospheric pressure is 90 times stronger than that on Earth. This environment is much more extreme that anything we're used to. Plus, Venus experiences earthquakes, lightning, and volcanoes that are way more powerful than the ones on Earth. The author provides information on all the reasons why our species could not live there.
Furthermore, he admits that NASA does not even have the needed equipment to safely and effectively travel to Venus. He only mentions that they are currently working on it. The author gives the idea that Venus could be studied from up above, in a vehicle hovering miles away from the surface. This way, scientists could get an insight on what's going on down there. However, doing that would prevent seeing most light, since it isn't able to penetrate the atmosphere. Even though the author does say better approaches are being worked on, no machines are completely ready. We simply don't have the required technology to keep humans safe on their expedition.
Finally, the author doesn't support his claim that going to Venus is worth it because the pros of traveling there are kept at a minimum. In his writing, he failed to give important reasons on why going there is essential. He does bring up that it's fascinating to astronomers due to how similar it could have been to Earth long ago. However, the potential similarity it could share is not a reason to risk lives to explore it. Yes, it is beneficial to study planets other than ours, but when it's so dangerous, it shouldn't be done. If the author wants to convince people that the pursuit should be taken even though it is unsafe, he should list more reasons why than just the fact that it's fascinating.
To conclude, the author poorly explained the reasoning to his arguement. He spent too much time hightlighting all the dangers presented. He should have gave readers better valid points to travel to Venus. Instead, he repeatedly wrote about the extreme conditions, or the lack of proper technology. Too much time was spent on the wrong side of his claim. The author should have supported his idea with reasons other than just pure curiousity. The cons outweigh the pros. | 5 |
8fe0875 | I believe that driverless cars are not the best answer to drving. To me it's just another reason to make america or the whole world to be lazier. Yes it would be nice to have a taxi service that doesn't have a driver, but what about the people who drove those cars for a living, they would be put out of buisness.
When making a new car safety is key, in order to make such a car you have to be sure that everything is optimal for consumors to buy. If one car goes malfuntioning that would be bad for the company. Although the idea defeats the point of the driverless car. When people are stuck in traffic they don't want to sit there behind the wheel moving inch by inch, but the car cannot drive in such conditions as close traffic, consrtuction, sites or around accidents, Which is one of the reasons people want the auto driving car so they don't have to sit through that.
So to me driverless cars need more improvement in safety and manuverbility, or they're not going to get many sales on this product, and if it is produced many people will complain and probably end up with lawsuits and refunds.
On the other hand though if this idea was a possibility with more safety with no driver needed at all then any company that perfects the production first will be very rich indeed. | 2 |
8fe2c25 | Driverless cars are a huge debatable concept. Some might not see how this would change our world. It would change our world in many important ways, and I'd have to say, these ways are positive. There are so many positive reasons on why this needs to be done, but many could disagree.
Driverless cars would use only half of the fuel compared to todays taxis. Not only would that mean a lower demand for gas, but it would also help out our enviorment! Think about a city, there are many lanes, and tons of traffic. Could you imagine what just one street of traffic releases so much polloution? It's killing our earth slowly, but surely!
Another good reason for driverless cars are the safety matters. Our technology has progressed so much throughout the years, and is only getting better. It would be a safer deal than now. The text states that Googles driverless cars have more than half a million miles without a crash. That would help our traffic, and our safety. The sensors these creators are making are insanely accurate. But of course, we would still need to be focused on the road. The text states that driverless cars need to be controlled when it comes to backing out of a drive way or going through construction roads, so don't think the world is capable of 100% no driving (yet anyways)..
I really think that this would reduce accidents by a landslide. Think about the distractions drivers face on a day to day basis, if we can find a way to avoid that, we should use it!! Too many lives have been affected by accidents, it's time to put a stop to it. | 3 |
8fe4399 | I think driverless cars will be a good invention for the future. I don't think we will have to pass a driver's test to get to drive one. This will save time out of our days that we spend studying and practicing to pass those permits and tests. Although these cars aren't completely driverless yet, I believe we will get there soon and our progress on it is fascinating. "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash, but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents."
Driverless cars have been thought of since around the late 1950's, it's just people or companies didnt have the technology, we have today, to make them. The cars also save money spent on gas and repairs. The article says, "The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus."
To conclude, yes I believe driverless cars are the way to the future. They will benefit us more than they will do harm, if any. Many companies have already started building their own edition of driverless cars. BMW have cars that steer, accelerate, and brake on their own, but even they sill need driver's assistance. And what about the driver's laws, will you have to be 18 to get one of these futuristic cars, or will there even be an age limit since the driver won't do anything? " Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020. The road to the truly autonomous car stretches on ahead of us, but we grow closer to the destination every day." | 3 |
8fe730c | Dear State Senator,
We should not keep the Electoral College. Every year it is a close election due to the Electoral College. In the system of the Electoral College the voters don't vote for the president, they vote for a slate of electors, whom the slate of electors then elect the president. The Electoral College is a disaster and is very unfair to all of the voters, it's outdated, and irrational. I know the Electoral College has been around awhile but it seems to make things difficult. Things should be kept simple when it comes to voting for the president. It's unfair to people because there vote could not even count, it's up to the slate of electors. The Electoral College consist of too many voters, it's not public getting to vote, it's pretty much just the slate of electors. It's almost like they are telling us that we have no choice in which kind of method people want to use. It's not fair to of how they elect the president. The method the Electoral College should not be in use anymore, it should be changed to a popular vote. The Electoral College cause the biggest election crisis in a century. It focuses on the tight races in the "
swing
" states. That is my arguement of why we the people of America should not keep the method of the Electoral College system. Abolish the Electoral College! | 3 |
8fecc8c | Throughout the past century car usage has exploded; from a luxury available only to the highest echelon of society to a tool almost essential to life. Although cars are convenient there are many downsides to having them. Some reasons a society that limits car use could be beneficial are: expenses, environmental costs, and health degredation. Hopefully together we can curb car usage and lead the way for a cheaper, greener, and healthier future.
Its a known fact that cars are expensive, but when you add up all of the costs how much is really spent. Especially for younger drivers; insurance is a ludicris expense, often totalling hundreds of dollars per month. Another expense, obviously, is gas. Gas may be at a 5 year low right now but the slightest instability in oil producing countries could cause prices to skyrocket. Still if you add in the cost of the car your looking at a highly expensive way of living. Life obviously could be less expensive without car use.
Another illeffect of car use is environmental impact. car emmisions are responsible for up to 50 percent of total green house gas emmisions in some states. Using cars is not good for the environment. Cars pollute are atmosphere and can accelerate the rate of ozone layer deteorioration. They also, indirectly, damage habitats by requiring new roads and highways to be built thus disturbing ecosystems. Automobiles also use large quantities of petrolium; a finite and ever neccesary resource in this global world. Car usage needs to be drastically reduced in order to preserve the environment.
Health issues can also develop from overusing cars. For instance, by looking at cultures that do not use cars it is evident that less children with autism are born to said peoples, such as the Amish. Another benefit of not using cars is exercise. People that drive instead of walking or bicycling are not only becoming more obese they are also putting themselves at an elevated risk for heart disease. Car accidents are one of the highest causes of premature death in the united states; thus if people drove less these accidents would occur far less often. The choice seems clear; a carless society is more healthy for all.
All in all, although cars may have benefits, the drawbacks of having them far out way any of said benefits. Car usage is expensive, bad for the environment and unhealthy. Together, society must ultimately decide whether life with automobiles is worth it and live with the consequences. | 4 |
8fefb41 | Is the use of technology to read emotional expressions of students in a class room valuable? There is new technology being devloped that can read emotions of people and paintings faces. This technology is valuable in the class rooms because it can help teaches keep the students focused and out of problems. This techology can read fake and real smiles which can be used to tell if a student is engaged in the subject or not.
The facial expression technology can be used to help teachers help the students know what there doing.
New face reading technology can give a voice to the quiet ones in class and help the teachers know what they are feeling.
The text explains what muscles are used to smile and fake smile."Meanwhile, muscles called orbicularis oculi palpabraeus make crow's- feet around your eyes.(That's instuction #2.) But in a false smile, the mouth is streted sideways using the zygomatic major and s diffrent muscle, the risorius . To an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a"smileing" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful". Now this is helpful in classrooms to know what students are really feeling and can even prevent
suicides if the teachers can use this information to help the student get the help they need.
The face reading technology can use the data to process sadness and boredom and can help the students more than the teachers. This technlogy is being created by some people that have studied these facial expressions and emotions. In paragraph 5 the author explains how the doctors that created this tecnology know their data is correct."yet Dr. Huang observes that artists such as da Vinchi studied human anato my to help them paint facial muscles precisely enough to convey specific emotions. His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code. The artist of the painting where also students of there craft so they would have pin point accuacy.This helps people now that they can lay back on this idea of face reading tecnnology.
Knowing that the technology is very accurate this can be used in the classrooms to help more that just the teachers, students but even the principles know if there staff might be off. This can help principles and advisors know how there teachers are doing. Say the teacher is in a bad mood and has a history of lashing out on others the priciples don't want there students are unhappy in there learning enviroment. The emotinal reading tecnology is great of the learning enviroment.
Is the use of technology to read emotinal expressions of students in a class room valuable? the technology is very helpful to teacher and advisors alike. It has the potential to stop many incedents in classrooms and the entire school. In the end no one can neglect the fact that this is very helpful.New emotion reading technology is the future. | 4 |
8ff090e | I think peolpe should got to the Seagoinh Cowbboys camp because It seems like Luke had fun. At first he didn't know after High-School graduation everything was going to change working two jobs at the bank and the grocery-store. When his friend asked him to come along he knew It was a chance to have a little fun, and get away from work. It would probably be a good idea to go to the camp because to have something fun to do once in a while.
If you went you would probably go and do lots of things you' ve never done before. Like for example when Luke went to the Acropolis in Greece, taking a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, acity with streets of water. Also he toured a excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal onhis way to China. Maybe you'd want to do something cool like that one day. Plus if your a animal person this should definetly be your thing because the animals would keep you busy sometimes. The animals had to be fed and watered three times a day. Plus Luke also found time to have fun on board (play games) after the animals were unloaded. Games like baseball, volleyball, and boxing It also helped pass the time If you were bored.
This could be a dream in a lifetime for you to go places you've never been and do things you've done It's not just taking care of animals It's also an adventure. | 3 |
8ff1420 | Is venus worth it? Venus is a plant that is close to Earth. They call it Earths twin its the same density and size. Venus is closer to the sun than Earth is withc can make it dangerous for it to be explored.
In the past they have tried to explore it they have sent numerous spacecraft to land Venus. Each of the missions have been unmanned. Since no spacecraft have even survied the land more that a few hours. This explains why exploring Venus could be a good reason or a bad reason. The passage states that they have been succesful in three decades. It is a very challenging plant for humans to study. The atmosphere makes it even worse to travel through it being 97 persent carbon dioxide. The preasure from it is 90 percent worse even on top of that it can reach up to 800 degrees fahrenheit.
Is the rish worth taking put humans in dnager just to explor the plant even if they are not sure of it. venus has the hotest surface temperaature than any other plant in our solar system. They say astrnomers are fascinated by Venus because its like Earth. NASA
is also working on studying Venus.
They say Venus has value because human curiosity will likely lead into intimidating endeavors. They also say that even though there are dangers here that means that we shouldn't stop what we are doing we keep pushing. They also say beacuse of doubts they shouldn't give up. If a spacecraft can't stay there for more than two hours then how do you explore it with out having risks. This could put people in dnager. They shouldn't go Because of the risks, Some peopel might want to go because of the golory of acheaving that goal for NASA but its just not safe to risk exploring a plant that has bad condictions.
In conclusion exploring a plant with 800 deagrees and 90 percet worse preasure than Earth. A spacecraft has not been able to land there more than two hous you need more than two hours to descover a plant. The risk is huge for exploring Venus. It is also the hotest plant in our atmosphere. They should not travel Venus at all to big of risk and a lot of doughts to even consider going. | 3 |
8ff1820 | What Lies Ahead
It will be a scary day when driverless cars become the new normal. Imagine roads filled with cars, but the drivers are like unalert zombies. Sure having cars that drive themselves sounds splendid, but would the benefits really outweigh the cons?
For many people learning to drive and getting their license is a huge milestone. It is like one step closer to becoming an independant adult. I can't imagine teens growing up and never learning to drive. That would be like not learning to swim!
Driving is a skill that people need to aquire even if driverless cars become popular, because machines fail. You can't always depend on machines to be accurate all of the time. You might be thinking that machines don't make mistakes as often as humans, but humans are the ones that make the machines. What happens if you are riding in a driverless car and it just stops working? Will you just sit there and wait to die?
In the passage it says that most driverless cars aren't actually driverless, they need assistance from humans. The fact that the car does most tasks like steering, accelerating, and braking makes it easy for humans to get distracted. Most people get distracted by their cellphones alone! If they thought they could totally rely on the car to do what they needed, they would probably be totally unaware of their surroundings.
There is a reason that only a few states allow the use of semi-autonomous cars. The laws are written for cars that are controlled by humans. The laws in place currently would not be suffecient for self driving cars. Sure the laws could be changed, but who gets to decide what the guidless to self driving cars should be?
Human brains are easily adaptable, but machines need to be programmed. What happens when a car faces a situation that it isn't ready for? Also, what happens if someone hacks into the car's system and makes it malfunction? There could be a computer virus that would cause all the cars in the world to crash.
Although I do think there are lots of cons to driverless cars, I do acknowledge the benefits. Early versions of semi-driverless cars have been somewhat successful by driving half a million miles without a crash. However, that doesn't mean that totally autonomous cars will be successful.
I think certain feautres on cars like cruise control are a huge benefit, but I don't know if I'm willing to trust machines to take the steering wheel yet. Who knows, maybe fifteen years from now I will own my own driverless car, but there are some huge advances that need to be made first. | 4 |
8ff3842 | In the article "Driveless Cars Are Coming", The author presents both positive and negative aspects of driveless cars. The good things that come with the cars are very helpful but at sometimes are very dangerous. The negative things that come with the cars are very life risking so if something happens and someone gets hurt its can either be your fault or it can be the manufactures fault.
The good things are that the cars can drive by theirselves,stop at signs and red lights. Also they alert the driver when there is danger ahead or when there is work been done to the road so that the driver has to take control of the car. With the driveless cars you car do things that you ever get to while driving a operational vehicle. Say for instance driving and texting or driving and eating you can do all the things you want to do in the driveless car but you can't do it in a operational vehicle.
The bad things are that you have to make sure if somethings happens like been involved in a acciedent and someone gets hurt you can be held responsible for that person. Also you have to make sure that the driveless vehicle is in good condition to where you don't have to fix anything before you drive it. It can be a life risking type of car because you can get in a reck and you are hurt really bad and can't move or you pass out then you will have to be rushed to the hospital. Another reason is that it can hurt your pockets because you have to get everything that was damaged repaired. | 2 |
8ff6bc7 | If driverless cars use less gas, polute less, and do not crash, I'm sure everyone would love to have them. The problem is that they might crash. Companies may state that their car will not crash, but people are reluctant to believe them.
If a car is 90% comupter driven, the only thing it is saving is stress the driver might build up while driving. The driver still has to be aware if their surroundings and still might have to take control. If the car was 100% coputer driven, I think more people would want one. If it was only computer driven, people could be more productive in the car. They could maybe get some work done or make important phone calls. Human error is always possible, but so is computer error. If money wasn't a factor, we'd already have smarter cars or smarter roads.
The only people who will want to be able to drive their car are people who don't trust the car, or peopole who want to speed and drift. If the cars were computer driven, they probably would go over the speed limit, unless a little computer error happens. If a computer driven car crashes, people will lean further away form the idea. I support the fact that they are trying to make them driverless. I would only trust them if they are proven to do little to no crashes. | 3 |
8ffb556 | Although Sergey Brin is seen as one who can invent and create virtually anything he can set his mind to, the idea of one day seeing driverless cars is challenging to grasp.
In 2016, a plethora of potential issues arise when it comes to the thought of driverless cars.
These very issues could be the deciding factor when it comes to whether or not driverless cars even exist.
The idea of driverless cars is proposterous in that there are too many regulations necessary for the cars to exist.
Many issues are discussed when it comes to driverless cars, but one stands out most explicitly: safety.
The safety of all drivers is threatened when robot cars are on the roads and highways.
Movies in today's pop culture portray the idea that robots could be an issue to humans because of their inability to properly function 100% accurately.
When 60mph speeds are brought into the equation, it seems foolish to put human lives at risk for unnecessary reasons.
If the cars simply assist humans while driving, it seems that this would be more manageable and more safe.
Law-making is also a conflicting element in the driverless car discussion.
There could be a multitude of court cases where robot cars could be responsible for taking lives.
Who would be blamed?
The process of restructuring laws would be too lengthy and quite useless just for thethought of inventing driverless cars.
It would take years to confirm a set of laws that perfectly fits all restrictions needed for driverless cars.
It is known that the car industry is possibly the largest industry on the planet, but it doesn't seem possible that people would be willing to restructure and reinstitute laws that have been standing for hundreds of years.
The argument could be made that driverless cars allow people to be more efficient while commuting through their day.
This could very well be the case, but this is likely the only positive thing to come from driverless cars.
The safety threats and arising problems produced by driverless cars greatly outweighs the positives.
Driverless cars seem to be a good idea until the many risk factors are taken into account.
Especially when the risks are death.
The car industry will continue to concoct more ideas and ways to make cars smarter and more reliable, but the thought of someday seeing driverless cars on the roads is not very likely.
educated individuals will analyze the positives and negatives of the situation and clearly see that this idea cannot become reality. | 3 |
8fffb65 | It is ridiculous that you think that this natural landform is created by aliens. It aliens would have created this why would they not leave a sign that it was them.
I believe this is a natural landform for many reasons. One is that the region of mars called Cydonia is filled with natural landforms like this one but this one just looks like an Egyption Pharaoh. Why would aliens go to Cydonia and make an alien artifact when Cydonia is filled with natural landform just like that one? On April 8, 2001 another spacecraft snapped an image of the face looking natural landform and found no trace of any sign of alien activity near the landmark. There were no people, airplanes, Egyptian-style pyramids, or even any small shacks anywhere near the landform. Why would aliens take the time to make this landmark if they were just going to leave and never come back.
It makes no sense why you would believe that aliens would have make this landform. You should believe me I am the scientist at NASA. In conclusion just trust me, the scientist at NASA, and just believe that this landform is natural not made by aliens. | 2 |
9005ce5 | the author suggest that studying
venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because he believes venus has value. also our curiosity will lead us somewhere. he believe us traveling should not be limited of the danger or doubts.
the danger will expand our curiosty of the world and beyond i. the author gives many and good a things to support his claims. He wants people to explore expand the imagination and curiosty by travelung and studying.
The author says in paragraph 8 "venus has value not only because the insight o be gained on the planet itself" the author is saying that there are many opportunites we have from studying venus he says how it could inspire our curiosty. paragraaph 8 "human curiosty will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors". He's bassically saying how us studying venus can inspire us to find new things and explre many things our human curiosty can make studying venus more worthy of doing it he wants us to get inspired and find many intimidating endeavors. The Author says how we shouldn't let our travel on earth and beyond be limited because of the dangrous posibilites. The author wants us to keep studing and exploring he wants us to expand or imagination and innovation to the edge. paragraph 8
in conclusion the author wants us to study venus and other places not just earth to expand our imagination. the author wants us to expand our curiosty to new things he wants us to travel and see a lot of things on earth and beyond. I believe we should study on venus and other things. i think is worthy for us to explore. We shouldnt let anger and doubt hold us back from explring and see new things in life and outside of our home. the danger will only get us more curios and will want to expand our imagination and curiosty from it. | 2 |
9014b2d | As author says Venus is dangerous to send humans to study the planet, the author does state we should still try and don't let the challenges stop us from doing so. the author states Astromnomers believe Venus was probably covered largely by oceans and could've support various type of lives. Have similar features like earth. Venus could be the nearest option to visit.
Astronomers are facinated by Venus beacause the believe "it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" meaning a similar discussion about Mars. They believe that Venus, long ago, "was covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life" demostration it could be an interesting visit to Venus and if the statements or beliefs are true, Sciencetist might find an answer why Venus doesn't support life or the bodies of oceans dissapear if it did have those features in the first place.
"Venus still has some features that analogous to those on Earth" meaning there could've been a possibility about life on Venus but also was discover that "the planet has a surface of rocky sidiment and inclused familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters" demostrating interesting theories people can make why those familiar features are in Venus and how they were created if no life existed there.
Finally, Venus "can be our nearest option for a planetary visit," for example: and "end of the world" scenario. People could travel to Venus to start a new life there, if researchers make an innovation to make it safe to land in Venus and probaly restore life in the planet if it did long ago.
The conclusion is, the reasons above explains why studying Venus is worthy despite the dangers. The visit can inspired a lot of researchers to make trips on othe planets that they may think it was Earth-like at some point or supported life in it.
The planet Venus may have a thick atmosphere meaning a human won't be able to survive; however, the innovations that can be created for those problems can solve it. The features the planet has might help us and make us understand why now Venus doesn't support life anymore and how humanity can avoid the same problem. | 3 |
9016294 | "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." That is a direct quote from Jim Garvin himself, the chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program. If a well-educated researcher such as Garvin says that the face-like feature on Mars is simply a natural land formation, why shouldn't we believe him. There is too much evidence disproving the theory that the face is an alien structure or artifact for the idea to even be fathomable.
The picture clearly shows that this formation could not possibly be that of alien descent. Scientists have proved on three different occasions that it is merely another isolated Martian mesa, which was common in the area Cydonia. NASA scientist Jim Garvin states, "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa," which only proves further that there is no sign of unknown life present on Mars.
Although NASA researchers would have benefited from having found alien life on Mars, they have proved that no such life exists or has existed on the planet Mars. Three different images from three separate missions has only proved this point further, there is no ancient alien marking or signs on Mars whatsoever. | 3 |
9016f48 | I would keep the Electoral Collage. So we can still vote for President and also Vice President. The Electoral Collage consists of 538 electors. Majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state puposes of ElectoralCollage.
Each candidate running for President has his or her own group of electors. The presidential election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. You vote for President because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors. Most states have a "winner take all" system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate.
After the presidential election, your governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment" listing all of the candidates who ran for President in your state along with with the names of their respective electors. Your state's Certificates of Ascertainments are sent to the Congress and the National Archives as part of the official records of the presidential election.
The Electoral Collage is windely regared as anachronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be overruled by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. But each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party nominee and that trust is rarely betrayed however it is entirly possible that the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. The Electoral Collage avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. For example Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral Collage 301 and 370 electoral votes respectively. | 1 |
9019f5b | Cars that can drive themselves is a type of technology that is coming. I believe it is a positive advancement. Many big name companies have been working on this advancement for a few years and in a couple more years these companies plan to have cars that can drive themselves on the raod. Having cars that can drive themselves can improve road safety and save lives.
Driverless cars can improve our lives and also make our lives safer. These cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves. They have sensors that makes sure the driver keeps their hands on the wheel. The also can prevent the driver from using a cell phone by a camera located inside the car to make sure the driver is aware. Driverless cars can prevent things like wreckless driving and speeding. Another thing these cars could prevent is drunk driving. The driver could return home safely even if they are drunk without having to put their life or someone else's life in danger. Driverless cars can also make driving fun. Manufacturers want to have in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. To make these cars even safer the displays can be turned off instantly to allow the driver to take over when they need to. Although these cars can drive mostly on their own the driver still needs to be aware just in case they have to take over. For example, the cars are designed to notify the driver to navigate through certain situations like going around an accident or through a work zone. The sensors that are put in these diverless cars can also improve safety. These sensors can respond to out of control skids or rollovers. These sensors can also cause the car to apply breaks on certain wheels and reduce engine power. The sensors have a far better response and control than a human driver does. These cars are a few short years from becoming fully driverless. These companies just need a few more years to make improvements on the sensors and computer hardware. These improvements will make the cars handle more driving tasks without the help of humans.
Driverless cars are coming and coming quickly although some may not like the idea of driverless cars i think it can be a useful technology. Automakers are making more and more improvements on driverless cars. Tesla has already released a car capable of driving 90 percent of the time on autopilot. As automakers improve the cars and work through problems with the law you will see more and more of driverless cars on the road. As long as automakers keep striving for improvement the more these cars will be fully driverless. Automakers are coming down the home stretch and will have 100 percent driverless cars on the road. | 3 |
90246bc | The author supports his idea by pointing out the risks and challenges the scientists,researchers and astronomos could have by going to Venus and trying to get just a little sample of rock,or something else they see it cold be intersting to study and investigate more about it like what it is?,what can be used for?,is it dangerous for humanity?.The idea of going to Venus it's not gonna be esay but if they do it,this can be a good chance for humanity to learn new things they thought they never could think about or even see. Many scientist consider Venus as a planet like Earth in terms of density and size.
In the article says "If or sister planet is so inhospitable,why are scientist even discussing further visists to it's surface? Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well one have been the Earth-like planet in our solar system",if Venus is like Earth it can be a chance for us to visit a new planet. In the process of preparing everything they need to make that travel ,scientist may have fail in what they were working on. Trying to know more about other planets in particular Venus can also be a good thing like what if in some years Earth is no longer sustainbility for the humans and we need another place to live Venus might be a good option,since scientist have take time and get to know more about how are the conditons in Venus and set how humans can survive it can be great.
In conclusion the use of events that had happen the author could support his opinion about the subject. Having curiosity to know more things and to search more deeo into it's good people can take their imagination beyond they thought it's impossible,traveling to outer space and see what things are there can be awesome. | 2 |
902eca4 | Although venus is referred to as the evening star, it is still a planet. Venus is one of the brightest planets and, you can easily see it on a dark knight. Researchers say thet venus is hard to examine because oh how bright it is and, how close it is to the sun.
The author states than venus is the closest plant to earth because of the density and size of it. Many people say that it's the closest planet to us however, every planet spins around at a different speed so one might appear closer than another. NASA has sent several spacecrafts to venus and its referred to as the most difficult planet to land on. Every spacecraft that's ever landed there has never made it back due to the enviroment and, the rough surface.
The author says that venus is almost all carbon dioxide and, its covered with corrosive sulfuric acid. He also states that venus is almost 800 degrees and, its extreme to what we experience on our own world. Venus is the hottest planet in solor system although, mercury is closer to the sun. Astronomers find venus so fascinating because it's the closest earth like planet in the solar system.
Astronomers also say that venus could have well been filled with large oceans and, could have supported many forms of life. Venus is very similar to earth because, it has rock textures such as valleys, mountains, and craters as to earth. NASA is eager to go back to venus to study the earth like planet. The author says that they are planing to have an aircraft that will hover 30 miles over the surface that will make it safe. Allowing them to do this will lower the temperature to around 170 degrees, but also the air preasure would be about the same to sea level on earth.
Although, hovering over venus would be safe, they would still find many challenges. Without them being on the ground they won't be able to take samples of rock, minerals, and gasses. NASA is wondering its they can make there equipment better to take on the challenge, and to see what venus is compared to earth. NASA will also have to come up with a way to make their equipment lighter, and also be able to last for the time period they are on venus. Modern technology is rather delicate than to the mechanical computers they used in world war 2.
Although its a struggle to experience venus, it also has a big impact on earth. Being able to see what venus is allows us to find new materials and gases that we have never heard of before. This could be a big impact to us. It could help us find new ways to create materials, and to better our everyday lives. | 2 |
90320ea | Dear State Senator,
Good day Senator,My name is Adrian and im a resident of this state. I wrote this letter to let you know,I think you should change the system up. I think the electoral college is a bad idea because it is not good at determining the winner. The electoral college is good but its alot of work to find out who wins the President and Vice President seat. The electoral college is also a big complicated system that can techanical mess up someones chances of winning. The electoral college is basically us voting for electors,not the president. The electoral college is not a good system to use beccause just like the article "The Indefensible Electoral College" says "Do voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate?". What do we do then, we can't take back our vote. This is how some presidents win without even knowing we messed up on voting.
In Addition to my idea about removing the Electoral College, I think its a bad idea because the electoral college is not a good determing the winner. A prime example of why the electoral college is a bad idea is when Al Gore lost the election in 2000 against Bush. It is stated that Al Gore had won the popular vote but lost when it came to electoral college he lost. It is said that over 60 of thoses voters wanted or prefered a direct election instead of the electoral college system. The Article"In Defense of the electoral college" states things that good about the Electoral College like "The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candiate receives a majority of the votes cast."This is a example of that statement is Nixion in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 plurality of the popular votes,while winning a majority in Electoral College. The Electoral College is still a democratic in many peoples eyes and mines.
The Electoral College will always give a advantage on the outcome of the winner. The state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors and thaat those electors could always the will of the people. The electoral college is is unfair,outdated, and irrational in the united states. Most say the electoral college is good because its keeps favortizm away but it really just adds it to the election. The direct election is way more simple and easy to find out who wins. I send you this letter to see if you would think about taking it out, but i know you probably won't see this.
From Adrian, | 3 |
9036351 | Dear Senator I am not in favor of keeping the Electoral College. We should not keep the Electoral College for many reasons. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agreed on one thing, and it was abolishing the Electoral College. Another reason being, under the Electoral College System, voters vote for a slate of electors, not the president and in return they select the president. Last but not least, the Electoral College is unfair to voters.
Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agreed on one thing, and it was aboloshing the Electoral College. This was also agreed upon by many other citizens. According to a Gallup Poll in 2000, which was taken shortly after Al Gore won the popular vote, but lost the popular vote. According to the poll "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election not the kind we have now." It is said that "this year voters are to expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again loose the presidency."
Under the Electoral College System, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in return elect the president. Because of this there are so many questions asked that are answered very broadly due to the fact you do not really know the correct answer. For instace, who are the electors? They can be anyone not holding the public office. Who picks the electors in the first place? It depends on the state. Sometimes state conventions, Sometimes the State Party's central comittee, and sometimes the presidential canidates themselves.
Man oh man is the Electoral College unfair to voters! This may be an opinion, but it is on of many citizens who are all in agreement of it." All of the "winner-takes-all" systems in each state, canidates do not spend time in each states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states." In fact in the 2000 campaing there were seventeen states the did not see the canidates at all and it was said that voters in 25 of the largest media markets did not even get to see a single campaign ad. " if anyone has a good arguement for putting he fate of the presidency in the hands of a few swing voters in ohio, they have yet to make it...."
As you can see I am in favor of changing the elctoral college to election by popular vote for the president of the United States of America. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agreed on one thing, and it was aboloshing the Electoral College. Under the Electoral College System they vote not for the president but for a state of electors who in return elect the president. Last but not least, the Electoral College is just unfair in so many differnt ways. These are reasons why I am not in favor of the Electoral College but in the favor to elect by popular vote for the president of the United States of America. | 4 |
903716b | Would you ever ride a horse to work or school? That's a bit out of date , don't you say? Well, why don't we use horses as transportation anymore? In my oppinion, this is because we've adapted from horse transportation. I think, everyday products, such as, cars should always adapt. Therefor, I am for the developement of driverless cars.
According to paragraph nine in "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it states, that states such as, Nevada, California, Florida ,and Distict of Columbia have allowed limited use for these driverless cars. This is good ,because they get to test these cars and fix the potentially spotted flaws. If these cars have been tested accurately , what is the problem?
Essentially, these cars could potentialy save lives. Statistically, texting, drunk driving and sleeping while driving are the topmost factors to fatal car crashes. If we had driverless cars, I feel confident that the death rate in this catagory will decrease. Futeristic automakers are under the assuption that the problems ahead will be solved, According to paragraph ten in "Driverless Cars Are Coming". This year, Tesla has relesed a car that pilots 90 percent of the vehical, according to paragraph ten in " Driverless Cars Are Coming". Within 2020, Benz , Audi, and Nissan will have an offer on driverless cars. In order to adapt, these cars need to be given the chance to succeed. | 2 |
9038586 | Having driveless cars would not be a great development for our community. For one, having cars that drive by computers can malfunction alot easier the humans driving. What if the car gets into an accident who would be at fault?
First of all, why would anyone want a driveless car that still needs a driver? Drivers would get bored waiting for their turn to drive. If you have a driveless car there is no point in having a driver because , the car will be driving itself. Most driving laws focus on keeping people safe. Having a computer driving your car which could possibly be hacked by another person, and then you will have no control over your car. My personal opinion on driveless cars is that it is really not safe to having something driving your car.
Secondly, is that if the technology fails and someone is injured who is at fault?
The driver could be at fault because the car is his/her name. It could also be the manufacturers fualt because, of one small thing they had messed up on. This driveless car could cause alot of damage to our society by the way it is driven by the computer. The compuer in the car can just do its own thing and the driver of the car having no control of it.
Lastly, How much money is going to cost to produce such a complicated device? It could cost a million dollars just to build one of these cars. w
In conclusion, having a drivless car is just ignorant in many ways. People have enough trouble just getting their license. Can anyone just go out and by one of these driveless cars or do you have to have a certain endorcemnet? The manufactures would have to come up with entertainment for the driver while they are not driving. There are so many questions and concerns about this whole driveless car idea. | 3 |
903a54a | You should join the seagoing cowboys. A seagoing cowboy is where you go over seas and take care of animals to help a country. A reason you should go to the sea going cowboys is that it's not only going to another county, but you can see nastional monuments and explore fun places. Luke Bomberger said that you will have an amazing time there. He also said that it was more than an adventure it was opening up the world to him. Luke Bomberger said that it's way more exiting than the job he had. He said that he got to see the acropolis in greece and he got to marvle at the panama Canal on his way to china. It might take awile on the trip there but you'll get to see amazing creatures and outstanding vews. Being a seagoing cowboy is one of the most fun things you will ever do in your whole entire life. I promise you will have the best time of your lives. | 2 |
903ab17 | Dear, Senator of Florida I think that we should change the electoral college to the election of popular votes for the president of the United States. So, that the people of the United States can elect which President and Vice President they want in the White House. In the Electoral College there are 538 electors and 270 out of 538 electors are required to elect the President. To the people of the United States thats not fair cause if 269 electors pick one President and the other 269 pick other President who wins then.
Let's not forget about the U.S. presidential Race in the 2000. When Bush won the the election because he had 271 electoral vote s and
Al Gore only had 266. But, Gore had more individual votes than
Bush only if we didn't have the El ectoral College .
that's why Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL CIO all agree to abolish the electoral college .
The reason why the electoral college is wrong because when voters vote there not voting for the president your really voting for a slate of electors, who might or might not vote for the president you voted for. If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of electors pledged to Kerry. And if they won the nationwide election, they would go to Congress and Kerry would get 34 electors votes. This is the reasons why I think the electoral college should be changed. | 2 |
903c321 | The computer software to read a humans' faces can be helpful, but it can also be harmful. It can be helpful to know what kind of lesson plan that your students are interested in and what ads to put up on their computer. It can be harmful, because what if the student does not want to talk about their emotions and they are having a rough day. Not everyone would want to have the feelings known by everyone.
The computer could use your emotion to manipulate you, and make you do things you woundn't normally do. Like bring up ads to make you spend money that you don't nesessarily have. Or bring up ads that make you go on a website that you really aren't supposed to be on. All of these things can cause trouble and the emotion reading software may seem like not such a brilliant idea.
The software may malfunction sometimes and read your emotion wrong. Giving you things on the computer that you do not want to see. You can become irritatible with your computer knowing that it knows how you're feeling all the time. It can become scary, and it may feel like someone is watching you just because your computer knows your emotions.
Not everyone would want this software on their computer, so it may not be as profitable as it was initially intended to be. When you are in a bad mood you don't want little things bothering you. Which means you don't want ads popping up evrywhere; even though you are interested in those ads you may not want them popping up too frequently. The software maybe inaccurate sometimes and that may cause problems. Evidently, this is not a good idea. | 3 |
903f1ba | Hi, i'm Luke and I think that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because you can visit many place while on your trip.According to the passage "I toured an excavted castle in Crete. I marvled Panama Canal on my way to China.Look at all the adventure you can take while going on the Seagoing Cowboys program.
Did I mention that I went to Greece. You might not be convince yet, but
i'm going to give you more detils on all the adventures you can take.I made nine trips that was more than any Seagoing Cowboy. You can think of it as a vaction.Like I did you can also find time to play games and things when you get back.It can also open up the world to you and you can explore things that you you never thought you could in your life.
That is all I have to offer. Now it's up to you. Being on the program can make your life open up and you could see brighter brighter days. You can have many admires as you want. This your opportunity. You only get one and I think you should take it
cause not may people can get this oportunity. Make the right decision and join the Seagoing Cowboys program.Have a nice trip Seagoing Cowboys. | 2 |
9040045 | Driverless cars, the way of the future? More like stay in the dream world! I think the idea of a driverless car is ridiculous at this point in time. Safety issues, misuse/abuse, and new ways of the road. All for the fact people don't want to drive themselves or it will be safer? I don't think so!
I have several reasons why I think driverless cars are pointless. Now, would it be cool to just take a nap and let the car control itself and take you to your destination? Yes, but in that case you would have to have a car that is actually able to drive itself. The cars are said to win people over if and when they are proven safe. The key word there "when". Sometime in the future driverless cars may become a big thing but right now they are not ready to be put on the road so I don't even think it is an idea worth proposing to the world.
Driving or asisting? If a car is designed to drive itself going 25 miles per hour or slower where are you going that you are only going 25 miles per hour it can't be very far. Funny thing is you are supposed to be alert just in case an obstacle such as a traffic jam or an accident occurs. How is it "Driverless" if there has to be a driver. Why not just drive the car yourself?
That is like having a self filling water bottle but you have to turn on the sink to fill it up. Also the cars would probably be used for people to sleep or just think they can relax while letting the car drive. No that is going to lead to accidents and wih a car thats supposed to be runnig itself whose to blame in an accident and how can you prove who was at fault. Here is wherre new laws would have to come in. To prove whose fault there would have to be a camera in the car recording to insure the driver was alert and it wasn't a manufacturing issue. Then isn't that invading one's privacy? Laws would have to change and there would be so many execptions due to liability and how to prove who is at fault.
I just do not think "driverless cars" are necesary especially when they don't own up to their name! Now if people could understand the car is asisting and not driving then i dont feel there would be an issue considering you have to be driving the so called "driverless car". We don't have the laws figured out for liability in an accident figured out and since you have to be driving the car I feel like its a useless name to get more attention. | 4 |
9040279 | The solar system, venus is the socond planet from the sun. Simple to see from the distant but safe vatage point of earth.and Venus is the most closeat planet earth twin vunus is the closest planet to earth it items of density and size.Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on vunus is more the three decades. And a thic atmophere of almost 97 percent carbon diovide blankets venus. and also notable venus has the hottest surface temputure of any planet solar system.Venus covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life and it was just like the earth.At thirty- plus miles above the surface temputure would still be a tasty at around 170 leveldegrees fanrenneit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth.Striving to meet the challenge presented by venus has value not because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating. | 1 |
904367b | "Why Driveless Cars Are Not Safe?"
I believe that driveless cars should not be developed because these cars are not safe, they're not developed completely, and if the driver is not taking caution it can cause harm to other.
My first reason why I believe that driveless cars should not be developed is that they are not safe because sometimes it requires human skills when going through work zones or accidents. If the driver is not alert and is sleeping and the driveless cars notices a work zone or accident the driver is not going to know. Right now the traffic laws have written that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. Driveless cars are illegal in most states because of safety precautions. Even if they were legal the trafic laws would have to make new laws to cover liability in care of accidents.
My second reason why I believe that driveless cars should not be developed is that driveless cars are not developed completely. The car driveless car can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but alll driveless cars are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead of them requires human skills. Since they arent not developed completely the driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when they there is a situation that requires human skills. The cars can be driven more than half a million miles without crashing, but the Google cars are really driveless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or with complicated traffic issues.
Finally, my third reason why I believe that driveless cars should not be developed is that if the driver is not taking caution they could cause harm to other people. If the driver sleeping and not paying attention to the road even though it is a driveless car it could cause harm to the driver and other people. Since the driveless cars are not fully developed the driver has to make sure that they are staying alert. Even though it might have a sensor in the car what if it sensor fails then how will the driver be alert that a traffic situation is ahead. Right now the traffic laws say the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. Also driveless cars are illegal in most states and its also illegal even to test computer driven cars.
These are the reason why I believe that driveless cars are not to developed because they are not safe, they are not developed completely, and if the driver is not taking caution they could cause harm to other people. | 4 |
904a43b | Self driving cars are a step into the future that is vital. For so long we have had to put up with the hassle of driving from place to place that it sometimes gets old. Self driving cars are more than just for acomidation or a fine example of how well off you are, they help with many things such as scientific understanding of computerization, fuel consumption and waste, as well as those who are visually impared or have any other kind of dissability that prevent them from driving. We as a nation must work together to bring notice to the regulaters who will not allow testing of Self atonomous driving cars because without the testing we will not be able to help that pregnant neighbor get to the hispital to deliver her baby in time, or help our grand parents get to a crucial doctors appointment, or simiply enjoy the clean and emmition free enviroment with our very own family. These and many other things are possible if we bring attention to regulaters and let car manufacturers work together to come up with the perfect car. I'm not saying it will be easy or quick because that is simpily not true, but together and with our needs we can make it happen. We really do need self drving cars it is only a process of advancement that should not be taken out of the equation of scientific evolution. | 2 |
904b3e6 | Why do people want to study Venus? Venus is a pretty dangerous planet so why do people want to study it? Is it worthy? Vensu is a planet closest to Earth and could resemble Earth a long time ago. Venus also is closest to Earth in density and size. It is a pretty dangerous planet because of its temperatures. Scientist are debating weather to study it despites its dangerous qualities it possess. In the article The Challenge of Exploring Venus The author suggests to study Venus despite its danger so we can truy find out how venus was and what we can do with the discoverings.
First, the author suggests to study Venus despite its danger so we can truly find out how Venus was. This planet could of been the most Earth-like planet long ago.
"Venus still has some feature that are analogous to those of Eath." says the author. The author also states "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar feature such as valleys, mountain, and craters." Since Venus had all these traits that are resemble Earth its no stretch that Venus could of been just like Eath a long time ago.
Lastly, the author suggests to study venus despite its danger so what we can with its discoverings. Since we have discover some of its obvious traits we can do something about that so we can later use it a Earth-like planet. The Author sates "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for planeary visit." What we can do with its its discovering is truly find out if we can make venus a "home planet."
In conclusion, the author find it interesting to study Venus even though it is dangerous because we it could be a loneg time ago and on its discoverings. | 3 |
904cc41 | Would like to go out into the sea and have alot of fun? I think i would! Here are a couple of reasons why, first off you could visit new places. Also you could see new things. Lastly you could get use to the water.
It was in 1945, World war 2 was over in eroupe and many counttries were left in ruins. So what i mean about visting new places is that, you could pretty much go anywhere, well as long as there was water. What i really meant was you can go to china florida all of those nice water filled places. Lastly they are just very nice and a besautiful place to stay.
Now you could see new things. Maybe things you have seen in pictures, or magazines, or something on your mobile device, that you would like to see in real life, like if you go to the china you could see "The Great Wall of China." Just those kinds of things makes it exciting to go new places and see new things. So i hope your ready for this next paragragh.
You would have to get used to the water! I know, i know it doesnt sound that bad, until one night you eat some bad shrimp and there is a storm a brewing up in the sky, the boat starts to rock in the wind, then you feel it coming, up, up, and out of your throat comes the vomit, over to the side of the boat you run. Hey i told you, you would have to be prepared for this paragraph, now didnt i warn you. Now back to what i was saying. You would have to get used to the water. There is a lot of things that could go wrong. You throwing up, you sliding off the edge. You would just have to get used to thed currency and record when the waves come by so you know when another one is coming. Like if a wave came at 2:00pm, then another one come at 2:30pm you excpect another one to come at 3:00pm.
Those were all of my reasons why i think you should go be a seagoing cowboy. | 3 |
904e0b5 | Have you ever wondered if the famous face on mar's is just there naturally or was it put there by aliens well it was actually just there naturally. Scientist's have proven that this famous face from magazines and once starred in a hollywood film is just a natural landform in a region of mar's called Cydonia.
This face is just a natural landform and how we know its a natural landform is because the article states, " It's just a huge rock fromation, Formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth". It's not an alien monument It's just a natural landform on mar's.
So that is why this iconic face of the 1970's and 80's is just part of the planet mar's itself and wasn't put there by another living speicies on mar's like aliens It's just some shadow's that come together a little bit to give the illusion of eye's, a nose, and a mouth in the region of Cydonia. This face was also discovered in the late 1970's specifically 1976. | 2 |
904ff51 | My fellow citizens, allow me to make an urgent announcement. Stop with the constant use of cars. It's damaging not only us, but the environment. We live in aworld where cars are now becoming a major trend, and we're driving them more and more. If we keep drawing that pattern, we won't have a stable world to live in.
I'm not saying to completely stop using your vehicles, although we might see a larger change than expected, what I'm saying is to manage your car usage wisely. Every time we pick up the keys, start our engine and take off to the nearest grocery store, we add a larger threat to the environment. In 'Paris Bans Driving Due To Smog' by Robert Duffer, it informs of the enforcement France is taking to clean up it's polluted cities. Duffer shows us how "the smog" that invades the city became a rival to Beijing, China, which is known as the most polluted cities in the world. Imagine going outside to see the beautiful sun, and instead open the door to cars delivering blinding "smog." We can't allow ourselves to become the most polluted cities, and the first step is to manage ourselves with our cars.
There's some of us who suffer from stress and anxiety. There's some of us who look at our community and are probably never wanting to go outside again. That is not a community to live in. We deserve to feel relieved, relaxed, and renewed from time to time. In 'Car-Free Day Is Spinning Into a Big Hit in Bogota' by Andrew Selsky, it demonstrates a perfect example. Selsky writes about a "Car-Free" day in Bogota, Columbia, and a man shares his side of this event. Carlos Arturo Plaza tells us, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air polluton." Selsky writes in paragraph 28 the benefits of this event. He writes, "Parks and sport centers bloomed... Dramatically cut traffic... New restaurants and shopping districts developed." Look what we can accomplish from not using our cars as much.
We're in a time where money is the top priority in our lives. All those gas prices, and the car insurance car owners must pay is ridiculous. Sometimes people can't even sleep at night due to all the thinking of "how will I pay this?", or "how will I pay that?" It later becomes a constant battle. This is when technology comes in handy. Now with the common "Facebook" and other social media, we're able to connect more and more. It's sad to see people waste their money going to a friends house for probably an hour or so, when they can just talk virtually. Elisabeth Rosenthal, writer of 'The End of Car Culture,' most likely will agree with me. Rosenthal inputs Mimi Sheller's say in all this. Sheller is a sociology professor at Drexel University, and she cites important factors on paragraph 35. "Internet makes telecommuting possible and allows people to feel more connected without driving to meet friends." Why drive and pay for gas when you can get on the web? You'll be glad you did.
Now, many will be able to disagree with me saying that, "we need cars to drive long distances," or, "I rather pay and have my own privacy then be with twenty people I don't know on a bus." That's fine. I'm not saying to wipe out the fact that you have a car, all I'm saying is to use it wisely. Drive long distances, not short ones that can take you ten minutes to walk. "What about the people who work in car companies?" Well, if we all followed what Bogota is doing and develop shopping districts and renewal companies, I'm sure there will be many jobs available. No matter the pay, you'll still have no worry about your automobile bills, which will help you save a huge amount of money. We need to save ourselves from driving and polluting the earth, or else we won't have a great life to live. Blinding smog will cover the sky, and many won't be able to enjoy the rich outside there once was. All we will see are streets instead of parks. We need to stop ourselves from driving too much in order to live to the fullest. | 6 |
9055d9f | Since 1976 people have been in awe of the mysterious "Face on Mars". It has been discussed in films, books, magazines, and talk shows. Some people even believe that it was formed by martians thousands of years ago as a monument, but recently scientists have disproved this theory almost entirely.
One of the reasons this theory is faulty is that the face was just a butte similar to one that can we see here on Earth. We have designed telescopes to discover if this was true or not and we found out that yes, it is just a natural landform on Mars. The shadows happend to be in the right place when the telescope had passed over the butte which caused it to seem as if it was a face. Concpiracy theorists could say that the martians merely just tampered with the sun or Mars so that the shadows would align every so often, but this is just speculation. This leads me to my next point.
The topic of martians has been a big one since the mid-1900s. We have dicovered many things about Mars since then and no evidence has pointed toward there being life on the planet. Scientists have although, discovered flowing water near the polar caps on Mars's surface. But even if there is enough water, lifeforms can not merely live off of it alone. Organisms need nutritious food to survive. Plants could not even live there because of the soil's lack of sufficient nutrients and it's harmful toxins it has. Besides, Mars is so far away from the sun that the plants would take almost twice as long to grow. Without the ability to have any food, the martians -if there were any (which I have already discussed)- would have died in the beginning of thier lifetime. Now you could say that they could be cannibals. This is just simply not right because if they were, they would have all died off before they could begin to work on the monument on Mars or even discover the technology to build it.
This battle of whether the "Face on Mars" was made by martians or not could go on forever even if we discover more about it. Who knows, the theorist could come up with some evidence later. But in the end, theorists are just theorist after all. They are just speculating even if the whole world knows what is fact. | 3 |
905684d | In the article "driverless cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverles cars. I am strongly for driverless cars because they let you relax at the wheel by driving. Another reason I am for driverless cars it will allow the roads to be safer. The last reason I am for it is they will allow pedestrians to use public transpertation with out there life in risk.
How will a driverless car let you relax at the wheel. A driverless car will let you relax at the wheel during traffic jams up to speeds of 25 mph. The only thing you would have to do during a traffic jam is keep your hands on the wheel. The car will make you keep your hands on the wheel by using sensors. 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.
Would anybody have ever thought there would be cars that dang near can drive their selves with out hurting anybody. Well the car designers are getting close. There are sensors on on some of these cars that will allow the car to brake instantly if the car is out of controll skids or roll overs. When these cars come out it will allow them to brake before running off the road. Without the option of smarter roads maufactures turned to smarter cars that can steer them selves.
World transportation with out worrying about the driver wrecking. There would not be no worrying if there were driverless cars. The google cofounder forsees these public transpertations using have the fuel that we use tody on cars. he beleives such cars would fundamentally change the world.
So one day we will not have to risk are lives riding public transpertation if there is no driver. In this article they have shown you why driverless cars are more safer and I have gave you my point of veiw in this essay so whats yours? | 3 |
90578ac | There are so many things that humans have not explored despite how close we are to them. Venus is the the closest planet to Earth but we stiill haven´t explored it in over three decades. Even though these missions to Venus are dangerous, we still need to explore what we can. In ¨The Challenge of Exploring Venus,¨ the author states that studying Venus is a worthly persuit despite the dangers it presents. The author supports this idea by describing how Venus might have once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system.
The author supports that Venus is worth exploring despite the dangers because it might have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. In paragraph 4, the author describes how important it is that we explore Venus, and how similar Earth is to this planet. ¨Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth" (4). This quote explains how similar Earth was to Venus and also describes the need for discovery. Venus is worthy to be explored despite the dangers because we need to see why Venus is no longer like Earth and why it doesn´t have forms of life on it anymore. Going to Venus would be a worthy persuit because we are very limited to the planets that we can explore and Venus is one of the only planets to visit right now with our current technology. This evidence proves the author suggesting how important it is to go on an exploration to Venus because it used to be similar to Earth, but it has vastly changed and we need to see how and why.
In conclusion, the author supports the idea thoroughly that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by describing how Venus might have once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. The fact that Venus and Earth used to be so similar is important because scientists need to discover why Venus is so different and how this happened. Going through with this exploration would be extremely benificial and would open up new ideas on how we can save our planet today. | 3 |
9059dde | Would you ever want to go on a trip to Venus despite the dangers? The author tells us the temperature average is over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure over 90 times greater that what we are used to on earth! Venus has the hottest surface planet temperature of any planet despite Mercury being the closest to the sun. The author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represents by telling us that NASA is working on approches to study venus without the dangers, and that NASA could allow scientist to "float above the fray."
NASA is working on approaches to study venus without the dangers. In "The Challenge of Exploring Mars" the author states, "These devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics." The "Mechanical Computers" could be helpful when studying Venus because it wouldn't be as dangerous if an actual person would go to Venus. The author also states, "Systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces." This tells the readers that using the "Mechanical Computers" can restrict some of the dangers by using not technology but mechanical wise computers.
NASA could possibly work on a blimp- like vehicle hovering over 30 or so miles above the roiling Veusian landscape, states the author. The author states, "... a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. "Using this possible vehicle you could work on studying Venus but also eliminate the risks or dangers you could face in the temperature Venus has. In the passage the author also states, "At thirty plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees fahrenhit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth." The author is trying to tell the readers that it would be bad if you just went there without anything instead of easily hovering over venus without the dangers you could face.
Furthermore, the author suggests that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represnts by telling us that NASA is working on approaches to study Venus, and that NASA could allow scientist to float above to fray. Studying Venus would be something that hasn't been done in more than 3 decades and coming up with something that could avoid the Venus dangers would be a miracle. | 3 |
905f9fb | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. the author supports this claim by using logos to give facts and numbers to the readers like, te average temperatures for venus are 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atomspheric pressure is 90 times greater then earths atmospheric pressure. the author also gives the readers pathos to show use what the profesionals, for example the National Aeronautics and Space Adiministration or for short NASA has one compelling idea for sending humans to venus and thats to study the plants resources and gasses but a big problem with that is if we did send humans there, they could only hover above the atmosphere like a plane because of how hot the ground and because it would be impossible for humans to breath due to 97 percant of Venus atmosphere is carbon dioxide that srounds venus, plus the clouds on Venus are highly corrosive sulfuric acid. addition to the problems with exploring Venus is that theres a ton of erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting storms. if venus is so inhospitable then why are scientist and the author so deteminded to visit venus? Astronomers are so fascinated by Venus because it may once have been like are earth with oceans and various life forms of life on venus. in short if vensu was once so much like are earth then what happened to it and thats what researchers and scientists would like to know, because whatever caused that to happen could happen to earth as well. | 2 |
9060375 | "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be imited by by dangers and doubts but should expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." This quote is by the author who is suggesting that studying Venus is worthy of pursuit despite the dangers it presents. "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" tells you about the risks of traveling to Venus, but how the exploration has value. The author could scare some readers instead of supporting his idea that Venus should be explored. The author does not support his idea well enough for people to be convinced that Venus should be explored despite the risks.
Venus has many challenges and dangerous characteristics, too dangerous for humans to travel and explore. Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets, and clouds of "highly corrosive sulfuric acid." The author states all these facts about Venus, and all of them describe a planet that is too dangerous to be explored. The author is not "supporting" his idea when stating these things, but he does support it when he states that Venus is the most "Earth-like planet in our solar system," because he is trying to get readers excited about exploring Venus. The author does not say these ideas enough for readers to find visiting Venus worthy.
The author suggests alternatives for traveling to the solar system, like hovering Venus, but these conditions are still dangerous to humans. We would only get limited insight if we did trial this idea. Also, researchers could not get samples of anything from the planet. The author also states that NASA is looking for other approaches like mechanical computers in the 1800s and 1940s, but the author also states that these computer may not be able to withstand the physical conditions of Venus. The author states these alternatives, but all of them have a down side that would not give enough information to the researchers.
The author does not give enough information about why we should take the risk of studying Venus. The author states many good insights about how our planet Earth and Venus are "twins", and how Venus has enough value to explore it. As readers, we see only the disadvantages the author states. For example, how hot Venus is, and how no human could possibly live if they went on the surface. Not only does the author state dangerous facts about Venus, he also states alternatives about how researchers could maybe find information about the planet. These altenatives however, don't satisfy what we want to figure out about Venus. If we sent people to hover safely above the planet, then we would only get limited insight. The author did not give enough supporting factors to the readers about exploring this dangerous planet. | 5 |
9060cd6 | When it comes to reducing the amount of cars, in any given area, there is multiple advantages. There are many up sides to it, it has a few downsides such as not being able to car far distances...but thats exactly where public transportation comes in. One great advantage to limited car usage is the reduced amount of obesity. When you dont have a car your only other options would be to walk, bike, skate, etc. which helps you lose weight. Not only that, but more parks and sport centers are being constructed. What about traffic? No one likes traffic, so by reducing the amount of cars in a given area, there will be close too no traffic at all. You'd be able to get to work or school on time, not have to worry about finding a parking spot, and generally get to where you need to be in a quicker amount of time. Pollution is as big of a problem as traffic, if not bigger. Many people claim that cars are the main source of air pollution along side with plants. Well, by taking away cars our air will be much fresher and more pleasant to breathe. | 2 |
9062d8c | In this article i'm against the development of these driverless cars because like it said in the article, "If technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufracturer" that quote in the article shows that there could be some accident or something that goes wrong with the cars. There are a lot of pros to the driverless cars, but also some cons. Some of the cons to the cars can get you thinking about if you really want it or not, and if its worth the money. Some cons to the cars are the cars are not completely driveless. You need to remain alert and be ready to take the wheel at any given time.
If you are thinking about buying a driverless car, you need to think back on the pros and cons. I listed one con about it, but theres more than that like the article states that they are big on safety concerns but if that was true there wouldn't be some downfall to the driverless cars. If you are still wanting the car how about if the technology of the car fails and gets you into a accident? You would be blamed for the accident and would have to pay for your car to get fixed and also the other people involved. As there are cons there's also pros that we could be focusing on too.
The features in these cars are unbelieveable that's why most people want the car. Some features of the new Prius are rotating sensor on the roof, video camera on the rearview mirror for more drivng percautions, and much more. The more safety these cars have the more people will want to buy them thats why they are starting to work on the safety hazards now so the car will be done by 2020. If the hazards are all worked out by 2020 I would change my mind and views on these driverless cars. The reason why I would change my mind if the car was safe is because there would be nothing that would risk losing my life to.
I would think more about buying these cars before I actually did. Would you want to spend money on a car now and have a risk of taking your life if you got into a troubling accident? Or wait until the problems are fixed and you have no disregards about the car you will be driving? That's why you should think before you want to spend your money on a car that has poblems.
So for my argument of the aspect of driverless cars i vote against it until everything is fixed and okay to drive. In the tenth paragraph in the article it states that "Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot ninety percent of the time" so if you are looking for a car now that will drive itself most of the time you can get some of these cars now. | 4 |
9063dd3 | I think that driverless cars have the potential to be significantly safer to use than manually driven cars. Many people get sucked in to their phones when they should be watching the road, don't feel comfortable in control of a car, or are just bad drivers. Driverless cars can lift the responsibility of all the passengers' safety off of the driver's shoulders. They can save thousands of lives.
Google's driverless cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. Even though theirs require partial manual control, this is a good sign of the safety of driverless cars. Yes, people may still need to learn how to drive, but they would need to drive less with one of these cars. The less a person drives, the less chances there are of an accident on their part.
Sensors on cars have been around since the 1980s, and have become advanced enough to detect and respond to dangers such as out-of-control skids or rollovers. They can make the car apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine. This is much more control than a human driver could manage alone. Driverless cars have the capacity to possess many more safety features than manually driven cars.
Since a driverless car would not be controlled by a person, it would not make the same mistakes on the road that a person would make. Even a partially automatic car could activate safety features to stop itself from going out of control. Driverless cars have proven themselves safe so far, and are likely to be even more safe in the future. That is why I think we need driverless cars. | 3 |
90643c9 | Hello! I'm Luke. I joined the Seagoing Cowboys Program and you should too. I loved it since day one. You should join this program because it is a great learning experince. I just could not say no when my friend Don invited me to go, I mean it was an opportunity of a lifetime!
First I went to New Orleans, the crew and I arrived there on August 14th. I got there the day the Pacific war ended. We got our seaman's papers and headed for Greece. We had 335 horses a long with us plus enough hay and oats to feed them! I will tell you what though you get attached to these sweet and loving animals.
I turned 18 before arriving in Greece. Instead getting drafted to the military service I got to keep going on with my cattle-boat trips! You should join because instead of fighting you could be on a ship full of lovable animals! By the time I was discharged I made nine trips! I think I broke a record of the most trips of any Seagoing Cowboy!
I hope to see that you have joined this program, just like I have. Think about it you get to be with a bunch of adorable horses. You don't have to go to military services. Going to exotic places is a rare oppertunity...unless you join the Seagoing Cowboys Program! I can not wait to see your dission. | 2 |
906472f | Dear Senator,
Keeping the electoral college would be a disater just waiting to happen. It is old, out-dated and irrational. Are we really going to keep using the same, old method that our founding fathers used hundreds of years ago? The method itself is unfair to many American voters. It is also unjust to the canidates who won the popularity vote, but not the electoral vote.
The canidates running for presidency usually focus on the bigger states with more electoral votes or "swing" states. This makes the voters in smaller states such as Rhode Island and South Carolina feel like their opinions and voices do not matter, that the president will not care for their interests. Having the electoral college gone, means that the winner-take-all system will also be gone, and will insure voters that the canidates will spend more time in their states trying to win their votes as an individual and not as a whole.
In the 2000 U.S. presidential race, Al Gone recieved more individual votes than George W. Bush, but lost the presidency, because he did not recieve the majority of the electoral votes. This is unfair to the canidate, knowing that you won majority of the populations votes, but lost the presidency. In an article called " The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" Mother Jones stated that after the 2000 presidential race, a poll was taken, over sixty percent of voters would prefer a more direct election than the one we have now.
In another article "In Defense of the Electoral College:Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President", they argue as to why we should keep the electoral college. The author of the article, Richard A. Posner, said that there is a certainity of outcome, that the winning canidate's share of the Electoral College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote. That being said, it shows that the voters' vote do not really matter, because it all comes down to the electoral votes.
Despite the numerous amount of people who disagree with the Electoral College and all the agruements against it, we still keep it. Why? What is so bad about getting rid of the Electoral College? It gives a sense to the voters, that they matter and what they say can determine the fate of who is president. | 4 |
9068698 | He is saying that mabey one time there was things living there like there were trees and water . Many things like nature and that its really hot and that its possible that humans can go . but that it will be hard to stay up there because there happends to be a challenge of who can get there first and NASA wants to send people to Venus to get and gather research . NASA is looking at electronics that they are making so that they can last up there just becase it can be up to 170 degrees in venus and they need to make everything to be resistant to the warmness and heat . Also the prssure that it will give beacsue all those things can just melt and that we should keep learning . not being scared of whats ahead to see what else is out there and to see what other kind of information we can get from going to Venus and exploring more and more and also that the scientist need to get really close to see what
is happening and to gather material tto see what they happen to contain and to see what minerals there is inside . they aso want there inventions and machines to last a long time to gather as much research as they can . | 1 |
907173a | While getting your first car may feel like a wonderful thing, it leads to many not as wonderful situations such as having to constantly pay money for gas, repairs, and insurance, getting in wrecks, and having to worry about how to get places efficiently. there is an answer to these problems that has been in the making for years, this wonderful innovation in technology is called the driverless car. These cars will be able to drive anywhere without human assistance and will be open to the public much like taxis. They are safer and more economically effiecient than regular human-driven cars.
There will be no need to own cars anymore with the invention of this new car of the future. This means many great things for the saving of money. It means that people will no longer have to worry about paying for gas or repairs to their car, because they will not have a car. They instead will have free access to public driverless cars which will take them anywhere they want. this also means that people will not have to be responsible for such an expensive piece of equipment such as a car of their own.
Driverless cars will also make great bounds in the ideaology of vehicular safety. They will be equipped with many sensors and cameras on their exterior and interior to sense any danger and be able to prevent it in a moments notice without endangering anybody as recalled from paragraph four in the article. These cars will also be driving themselves, a situation that will take away the risk factors that are commonly associated with human-driven cars such as texting while driving and impaired driving due to alcohol or drugs. All of these factors lead to the conclusion that there will certainly be less and maybe even no wrecks with these amazing driverless cars.
Driverless cars will also make way for a much more economically efficient transportation system. As mentioned in paragraph one, these cars are said to consume about half as much gasoline as a normal human-driven car. This is in part due to the cars having a built-in GPS system that will guide the cars to the destination in the fastest possible route. Also, there are more economically friendly cars that are being sold now and these driverless cars will resemble those cars, but with even more economic efficiency and the extra perk of having the ability to drive itself.
All these perks of driverless cars are outstanding innovations in the technology of today, so why would we not take the opportunity to incorporate these into our daily lives?
Driverless cars are the future and the future is now, so out with the old human-driven cars and in the with the new, more economically efficient, safer, and cheaper driverless cars. | 4 |
907365b | Lukes Point of Veiw
If you join the Cattle-boat you could have the time of your life you could see thinges you
never seen before you could go in caslies and see so much stuff I had a great time everyone is nice they all work together and have a good time.
If we get avery thing done we could play some board games. Or when we take the animals where we need to we could play baseball, volleyball, games, table-tennis tourments, fencing, boxing, reading,whittling, and games also help pass the time. You could also hang out with me more. We could see animals we never seen before.
We could go to China and go cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States whole careing animals and having a good time. We could see at night if the animals are ok and have a good time. If one of us are about to fall off the ship one of us could catch one another.
So that is why I think that we could have a good time when we are working and we could have a lot of fun. Made you will come but it is up to you. | 3 |
9074727 | The idea of driverless cars is one that we have seen in many places, and heard of many times. Although, we have never quite reached that achievement, I believe that driverless cars would have a great impact on todays society in a both good and bad way My belief is that this invention believe has a more positive affect. This creation can help our world have safer roads, better environment, and could actually help our environment in many ways. With the correct technology and great intention, we could eventually live in a futuristic type of world like we have always seen in movies.
Driverless cars aren't actually driverless quite yet, but they still need assitance in different occassions. For example, Google has had these cars since 2009. The cars have been tested driving more than half a million miles without a crash. The conditions where it can't perform by itself is pulling out of drive ways or driving around complex traffic. These cars still allow one to drive but it also is a way for people to sit back and just enjoy the ride. So although we might not have complete driverless cars, we have already been proven that it is possible top have a car that drives safely by itself.
Since we have seen that these cars can perform safely without an accident occurring, think of how many less accidents would occur. Many lives have been lost due to drunk driving, reckless driving, and even texting while driving. With these cars that perform on their own, people will no longer have to drive under the influence. People will now have the chance to text or call while in the car, and it will eliminate more accidents from occurring by this type of reckless driving.
Now that we know that these cars are a safer way of driving and how people could still have access in controlling these cars, we can talk about how these cars can help create a healthier environment.The Google cofounder Sergey Brin has spoken about having these cars that half the fuel of today's taxis, and that would be great for our environment. Having these less fuel cars will help create less pollution and will help decrease in smog and contamination of the air. Today, many people have cars and will use up lots and lots of gas for them which really affects our air. The cars that Mr. Brin has in mind will help us become more healthy when it comes to our environment.
These are not all the great things that could be an outcome from this great creation, but just a few. The driverless car proves to be a new, safer, and improved way of transportation.It benefits people today in many ways and will leaqd to a rising economy. My arguement is that, I believe we shouldn't pass on this great oppurtinity and we should take advantage of this newer way of transportation. It may have many things needed to improve, but it is a great way to start, and I know this driverless car is just the start of something even bigger . | 4 |
9077883 | I think people should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program because it can be a life changing experience. It can be a life changing experience because you can visit places,help animals as they travel over sea,and you can have fun while on the job. There are several reasons why people should join but i'll explain the major three.
My first reason why people should join the program is because you can travel to places you'll wont see everday. In the text it states that Luke said the cattle boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small town boy. He also said he had the side benenifit of seeing Europe and China, also he said seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special.
My second reason why people should join the program is because you can help animals grow,help them stay healthy, and and get them to their destination safely. In the passage it states the animals had to be fed and watered two to three times a day. The text also states that bales of hay and bags of oats had to pulled up from the lower holds of the ship,and stalls had to be cleaned. Also the text states that Luke helping out his aunt at her farm as a boy helped prepare for hard work.
My final reason why people should join is because you can have fun to pass time. you can find things to do to keep you entertained. In the text it states that Luke also found time to have fun on board. The text states that the cowboys played baseball and vollyball games. They also had table tennis tournaments and boxing.
In conclusion joining the Seagoing Cowboy program can change your life in many ways you can care for animals and go places you will enjoy and have fun at the same time. | 3 |
90779cd | Should we keep the Electorial College the way it is or change it to election by popular vote? Statistcs show that over 60 percent of voters vould prefer a direct election, rather than the kind we have now. Even with that being said, the electorial college still has its ''defenders''.
The Electorial college is made up of 538 electors, a majority of the 270 electorial votes is required to be elected to be President. Each state is allowes allotment of electors. One for each member in the house of representatives, with two each for Senators. Each canidata running for President is allowed their own group of electors, which are normally chosen by the candidate's political party. With that being said, state laws vary on how the electors are picked and what each of their responsibilitys are. Each Presidential election is held every four years, on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
What is so wrong with the electorial college that 60 percent of voters would prefer to have a direct election? Well, under the electorial college system voters do not vote for the president, but vote instead for a slate of electors. Say you wanted to vote for a president who is Demographic, you would then vote for a slate of 34 demographic electors that pledged to that president. The electors are not allowed to be someone who is holding public office. With this being said, the voters cannot always control who their electors vote for.
In the ELectorial Colleges' deffence, its avoids the problem of elections where neither of the candidate's recieve a majority of the vote. It is very possible that the winner of the electorial vote may not wint the national popular vote, even though it happens very rarely it happened in 2000. Gore had more popular votes than Bush, but still fewer electorial votes, that was the first time since 1888. n
The thought of having to vote for the President of the United States, you actually get to pick who you want it to be. That would mean not only changing the constitution and having to come up with more rules and responsibilities, but allowing one to vote directly for who they want to become President. Wouldn't that be easier? Instead of having to come up with a electorial college and dealing with all of the risks, allowing citizens to pick for themselfs. I agree with the though of abolishing the electorial college, and so do 60 perecnt of voters. When a citizen votes on the electorial college itself, they have the chance of the college not pivking the President they would like to vote for.
With all of that being said, and the facts given right to you, it up to you to decide what you think is better for the United States. Either way, we still have to vote on a President every four years... with or without a Electorial College. | 3 |
907adf1 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Venus is the second planet from the sun and is known as the evening star. It's a plant that is easy to see far away but hard and dangeorus to see up close. The authors gives a lot of reasons why Venus is important and different why to learn more about it.
Some reasons Venus is worth sudying is it's the closest planet to Earth by size and density. Not one single spaceship was been able to land on Venus for more then three decades. And some people belivie this is because no one has survived on Vanus more then a few hours. The artice said it is dangerous because clouds od highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. The temperature on Venus is averaged around 800 degrees fahrenheit. And the atmospheric pressure is 90 times what we experince here on Earth. A lot of scientist feel that venus is the plant that is the most Earth-like. Becuase the Plant has a rocky surfaces and have similar features like mountains, valleys, and craters.
So this is the details I found to support the idea of studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. And I feel in a couple of years it's not going to be dangerous anymore. I feel this way becuase NASA is working on other approaches to study Venus. These are simplified electrons made of silicon carbide and mechanical computers. And this are going to help becuase they are going to last longer on the surface and you won't have to get out to sample the rocks, gas and everything else. And they are going to be more powerful, flexible, and quick. | 2 |
907bf79 | Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth due to it being the most Earth like planet in our solar system. Venus has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features to Earth such as valleys, mountains, and also craters.
If we were to explore Venus and learn more about it we could use it as a backup plan or Earth incase something were to happen to the current one, not to mention it can be crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. But traveling to Venus can be dangerous. Not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus for more than 3 decades,97 percent of the atmosphere is carbon dioxide, the clouds highly contain sulfuric acid, the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater, and it can be really hot, hotter than mercury even. But scientist in NASA are finding ways and building new technologies to study about Venus. For example bump-like vehicles hovering 30 or so miles above the landscape to avoid any unfriendly conditions by staying in the air. It would still be hot and the air pressure would be close to sea level but it would be survivable for humans.
Although it would provide a limited amount of sight, you would still have to chance to not only see but to explore safely and learn more about Venus. Traveling to study Venus will not only answer unanswered questions, but can come in our favors in the future. Yes, it will be dangerous but it will teach survival and give us answers. | 2 |
9082c97 | Venus is a dangerous place for humans but what about tecnology. Acording to scientists venus is a dangerous place but they want to find out more about it. With venus beeing over eight hundred degrees fahrenheit and an atmosphere if almost ninety-seven percent carbon dioxide.
Scientists still want to find out more about it. They have had many space ships go up there but they could not land them. They want to make somthing that floats 30 miles above the seface of venus so that they can study the planet more. It would be onehundred and seventy degrees fahrenheit and the air pressure would be clsoe to that of sea level on earth. The ship would be powerd by solar panels and the radiation would not exceed Earth levels.
All this shows that the author supports this idea by showing that it is possible for the journy to be safe and it would get us closer to finding out more about venus. Whit the ship floating above ground it will provide little insight on the ground.conditions because most forms of light cannot penatrate the dense atmosphere. This makes standard photograghy and videograghy useless. This also means that scientist would have to get up close and personal to get rock and gas samples.
NASA is working on other ways to studing venus. This mean we might not have to take a risk to get hurt or harmed in any way. They have made something out of silicon carbide and it lassted up to three weeks in venus conditions.
The text states in paragrapgh eight that" stiving to meet the challenge presented by venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also human curiosity will likly lead us into many equally intimidating endevoers". This shows that the authors ideas about figureing out more about venus are good ideas now we just have to figure out how to make it work. | 3 |
908493d | Have you ever wondered exactly what other people were thinking or feeling? Do you know students who are often confused when they learn? Have you ever considered what it would be like if you could tell what other people were feeling exactly? A new technology called Facial Action Coding System has been tested to find the exact emotions of other people. For example, in the first sentence of the first paragraph it describes Mona Lisa's exact emotions in percentages. Many people wonder if this new technology could be useful in a classroom to detect whether children reallly understand a concept or if they just say they understand.
Children in school are often confused with a certain subject and are too embarrassed to speak up. Some people sugjest that the new technology Facial Action Coding can change that. In paragraph 6 of " Making Mona Lisa Smile"
it states " ' A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Huang predicts. ' Then it could modify the lesson like an effective human instructor'"(Nick D'Alto, Mona Lisa Smile). Dr. Huang suggests that if we brought this technology into the schools then some children may be able to succeed. Teachers with this technology could use it to improve their lesson to captivate the students or help them individually.
The children could benefit from the teachers improved lesson by getting more involed in the classroom. Overall if children were introduced to this technology, They would succeed not only in shcool, but in life too.
The author of this passage has pointed out some very interesting facts. The author has pointed out the fact that children may not have the best attention span and may not understand what is going on. The author suggests that people should bring technology into schools to improve the likelyhood of the child succeeding. many studies have shown that this technology works, so the author wants the children to have a shot at becoming the best they can be. Technology used in schools like this can benefit the next generation of doctors, educators, and politions. Facial Action Coding can bring fun back into a classroom and help students in the long run. | 3 |
90849db | There are many advantages to limiting car usage. The majority of the advantages are towns that are closer together and car accidents will be much more widespread and unlikely. Only in some cases will people use cars, and in those cases it is only for doing long distance transport, such as driving across the country. The most important and final advantage is that it would reduce emmissions from all cities if it is done in the major cities of the United States, and everywhere else.
The first example of the advantages that I will use is the closer together cities. We know that Germany has already made an emmission free city, and you have to pay a lot of money to be able to park, or even drive. The city has closer together work places, restaurants, and stores, so it is easier for people to make a quick run to the grocery store on their walk home, rather than having to travel for 30 minutes to get to the grocery store, spend an hour there trying to get your food, and then traveling home for another 30 minutes. Overall, the closer cities with high prices to use a car will be better for our planet, and reduce emmissions from many countries on the planet.
The second advantage that reducing car usage has, is that it would widely reduce the amount of accidents people have every year with cars. Bike accidents would happen more, but they would be less likely to hurt someone severely, or even take a life. This means that more lives would be saved with the use of less cars.
The final advantage is reducing emmissions. If we keep moving along the pace that we were moving along when we were at our high point, Earth could end up looking like Venus much sooner than we thought. Although it may not be in our lifetime, we don't want to mess up the future for our children or grandchildren. If we do reduce emmissions, and keep Earth as the "little blue dot" in our galaxy, then we are doing something great for the human race, and we should keep doing this as we move along in everything we do.
To sum everything up, if we start creating closer together cities, emmissions from all vehicles will be reduced, and many less accidents will happen in which someone will be killed. Reducing emmissions will save our human race in more drastic ways than we can imagine, and it would most likely help us keep our planet the way we started with it. Green, blue, and white. | 3 |
908dc9b | Today I'm writing about The Challenge of Exploring Venus. Venus is sometimes called the "Evening Star". Its one of the brightest points of light in the sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot. In our solar system, Venus is the second planet from the sun. While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely.
First, there's a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. On the planets surface temperatures average over 800 degress Fahrenheit, and the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater that what we expreinced on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an enviroment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liqefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather presnt additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
However, peering at venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atomosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective. More importantly, researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance. Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges. Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to out knowledge of Venus.
Last, NASA is working on other approches 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 project is looking back to an technology called mechanical computers. These devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and played an important rolein the 1940s during World War 2. The thought of computers existing in those days may sound shocking, but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Just imagine exposing a cell phone or tablet to acid or heat capable of melting tin. By comparison, systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces.
Finally, I'm talking about all the things i talked about in my paragraphs. I talked about Venus and it's nickname, the amosphere percent, orbiting and hovering and then the NASA. | 1 |
90925e4 | Dear State senator,
After reading this article "Does the Electoral College Work?" I've come to believe that we should keep the Electoral College because, look at all the rights and goods we have establish untill now. What im trying to say is that the Electoral College do work, for example This method is widely regarded as an anachronism. Also that it can still be a elcetion, "it is entirely possible that the winner of the election vote will not win the national popular vote," so I believe its fair on both sides. It happen in 2000, with Bush and Gore where Gore had more popular votes than Bush but less electoral votes, and we all know would won that year.
The Electoral College do has it cons for example, the voters actually vote for a slate of electors and not for the president. So if you live in a state like Texas for example, your votes goes to 34 Democratic electors that you don't know and this can create confusion about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate. The best argument about the electoral college is the disaster factor. It happen once in 1960 where "Louisianna legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who oppose John F. kennedy," Which means that those popular votes for Keenedy would not actually gone to him. Bob Dole says the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational.
In despised of the Electoral College cons, here is five reasons of keeping this method of choosing our President. Certainty of Outcome, Everyone's President, Swing States, Big states, and Avoid run-off elections. With these five reasons the electoral college allows us to "restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution..." also you can say that it has been working for as all as it has been here with us, so why abolish something if its working. | 3 |
909d6a1 | Zroom! A driverless car drives by on the interstate clocking in at 80 mph, with astonishing remarkable skills on the road. Driverless cars are the next step into the future. I will be discussing the pros, benefits, and cons of driverless cars.
Driverless cars are a great way to get from point a to b without even having to touch the wheel once. You wouldn't have to worry about your driverless car being in an accident, since the manufacturers have designed it with many sensors to enhace the efficiency and quality of your car, so it can mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. There are many benefits from driverless cars, for instance you could go on a road trip and you wouldn't have to touch the wheel once. Also with driverless cars you could get many new features like in-car-entertainment and information systems that use head-up displays so the driver doesn't get bored. Other benefits are like added cameras to the car so the driver can stay focused on the road while the car drives by itself. But with many machines,eletronics, etc. There will always be many cons. Some cons of the driverless car is when it gets into a traffic jam, the driver will have to take the wheel and drive. Another con is sensors could go bad and cause the driverless car to not peform at its potential and creating hazards to other cars or pedrestians.
Driverless cars can be the next step into the future. My preview points were the pros, benefits, and cons of driverless cars. Driverless cars are the best addition to the roads with many pros and benefits. With proper improvent we can lessen human mistakes by letting a self driven car that is smarter on the road, and we can lessen car accidents and tradegies. | 3 |
90a37d9 | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author states how new technology can help students. I believe this to be true. I think it is true becasue if the Facial Action Coding System actually works then it can switch the students lesson up and help them learn.
One reason I think it will work is because as a student I personally tend to get bored and doze off and get distracted. I also know this happens to other kids because too because when i'm bored I look around the room so i see all the other students who are not paying attention. If a student were toget mad and the computer sensed this and changed up the lesson then that could get the student back into it and make them want to do the work. these computers would make it the same as having a perfect teacher there for every student.
In conclusion I think that the "Facial Action Coding System" is valuble to us and every student. I think they could really help students who struggle with being bored and just not understanding things in school. The End | 2 |
90a4d07 | I think that the new technology to read students faces in the class room could be of some use, but I also think that it would not be of use in the classroom. The reason I think it would be useful is it could help a teacher understand some of the kids facial expressions.
A teacher can read the childs face to see if they can help then when they are sad and dont tell anyone, but I also think that it would be an invasion of the childs space, because sometimes when kids or even adults get mad or sad and they dont say anything to anyone it's because they dont want people to know. It could help in somecases like when a child is being bulllied at school and they dont tell someone then the teacher could use the device to see that the child is either sad or mad or even both.
I support and do not support this at ther same time. i support it because I feel it could be helpful but I do not suppot this because I feel if a child needs help with how they are feeling they will go to an adult they trust, weather it be a teacher at school or a parent or even a friend at achool. | 2 |
90a8004 | Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because, Venus used to have bodies of water and had many different forms of life. There are other explanations like having a surface of rocky sediment and includes valleys, mountains, and craters. So they Venus might be the only other planet that can probably support life.
There are so things that can't be done. It might've supported life back then but now the average surface temperature is 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experienced. So landing on Venus is almost impossible for humans. Also Venus has the hottest surface tempature of any planet in our solar system because of all the erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and the frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
Although, these conditions are pretty bad, The National Aeronatuics and Space Administration (NASA) has one compelling idea for senbding humans to study Venus. NASA possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. For example its like a jet airplane that travles at a high altitude to fly over storms. So a vehicle overing over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way.
However, peering above the ground from a ship can only limited insight on the ground because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective. More importantly, researchers can't take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance. Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close despite the risks.
Eventually will have the technology to reach Venus and study Venus a lot more closer than hovering over the planet. When we have that technology then more researchers can see if Venus can sustain life or not. But until then we'll have to study Venus from a far and ovserve as much information as possible. | 3 |
90a9318 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author describes where the cars are now and how they are effecting society.
Even, after reading the passage, I don't believe that driverless cars should be a reality right now.
Maybe in a few years, when changes are made for safety precautions, but in the now, we can handle driving on our own.
Having the "smart roads" equipped with electrical cable or magnets, as General Motors and Berkeley engineers did in paragraph 3, would never work with rebuilding all new roads all over the world just for these cars.
Imagine the time and money spent just for these roads to be built.
And what will happen once the passengers are on a road without these "smart" adaptions?
Because of this, the next version of this driverless car is to rather equip the car with sensors and not the road itself as the Toyata Prius did in paragraph 4.
But no matter how many sensors, lasers, or recievers you have on this driverless car, artificial intelligence will never be as smart as human intelligence.
What will happen when a deer jumps out from a field, a pedestrian rides his bike, a child's ball bounces out from her yard, or a pothole comes near comes bouncing from her yard? Will the sensors and lasers notice the change and react as fast a human would?
Even if there is still a driver in the seat, as said in paragraph 8, what will keep their attention on the road and not fixated on their phone or other passengers?
No amount of buzzing or flashing lights will get the attention of the driver to whatever accident may occur quick enough to make a change.
If anything, the displays will make the driver panic in such a way that will make their safety decline further.
Driverless cars are especially targeted to keep those who would normally drive while under the influence of alchohol and others safe from them.
But once again, what if something should come between the car and where the car wants to go?
The "driver" under the influence of alchohol cannot to anything otherwise, especially with the displays distracting the driver further.
Without these driverless cars those under the influence would normally grab a taxi or ride home with a friend, but with the driverless cars, he/she would be a potential threat.
In conclusion, having driverless cars in the world would not be nearly as safe as human intelligence.
The driverless cars will be more of a distraction on to the passengers and essentially, will not help any of the passengers nor pedestrians around them.
There are much too many scenarios that could go wrong rather than if a human driver was actually in control. | 3 |
90ab0d6 | Ever wonder why we havent really been to Venus, yet? Well now here's ur answer why! In the last paragraph of this story the author says "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travles 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 proves my point that the author supports the idea of leaning more about Venus. The author tells us how worthy Venus discovers will be depite all the danger the author has talked about int this story. Venus was Earth twin because Venus was the closet plant to Earth, size and in density. NASA has sent spacecraft to Venus so we could discover the mysteries of Venus but sadly the spacecarft were destroyed and thankfully they were no men in any of the spacecrafts that were destroyed. These are one of the reasons why going to Venus is dangrous. In the seven paragraph it states that "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 project is looking bcak to an old technology in the 1800s"
You can see that NASA has been busy studying ways to get an man on Venus despite all the dangers. The author supports this story really well, he/she gave us the why and why not so good job author. | 2 |
90af7bd | The world has come to change as we know it, one of these big changes is limiting cars. We are having a movement where cars aren't needed, it's a slow process were you won't see the result until you compare back then to now. This change is happening due to people living a more active life, and minimizing global warming in small ways that have big results.
"70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold cars to move there." There is hardly any accidents involving cars because there is no use for them. we are living a life were you dont have to be afraid of crossing the street, and people in cars don't have to be tense for fear that they might crash someone. Living a life were your life does not center around a car is not something you would expect to have such great results, but, it does people are genuinely happy that they aren't driving cars. Not having a car has given so much relief and less tension to people, knowing that they are active and getting from point A to point B while doing it.
We have so much pollution going on and one of the biggest causes of it is cars. "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." This care change is going to be the begining of something big for the simple fact that this is something foreign to us. People are reducing car usage by carpooling, walking, public transportation, etc. These are all moving to a commin goal and that commin goal is to make the world a better place to stop causing more damage then what there already is and while doing that we are benefiting ourselves.
In clonclusion, the whole basis of this is wrking together to achieve happiness, and a safer place for older and younger people. Our world is change, our life isn't centering aroung a car and whether we think it's what's the coolest car these days. We are becoming active, heathier, and cleaning up the mess (pollution) we've made and making the world a better place. | 3 |
90b0f95 | Dear State Senator,
Have you ever sent your vote to where its is in the hands of other people not knowing what is going to happen to it like is it going to be counted for the person you want it to, or it could be for the person you really do not want to win. Well that is called an electoral college. It in my opinion is not a very good system because, you don't always get to vote for who you want to.
I believe that we as individuals have the right to choose what we want in a leader. I do not believe Electoral College. For the simple fact, we do not always get to vote for who we want to run our country. The people of America have their own beliefs and own opinion and when it comes down to where we have to choose the person who will be running our country for four consecutive years we will vote for the one we believe that will not hurt our beautiful country. But if we did choose the Electoral College and I wanted to vote for John McCain for instance, and is sent it in and now your vote is in the hands of other people now you don't know if your vote is gonna be for John McCain or Barak Obama. Therefore I do not like or consider anyone using the Electoral Collage.
By using the popular vote you are guaranteed the vote you wanted. You don't have to worry if you vote got changed or not. You popular vote is what you wanted to choose and no one could change that
So I think I speak for the people when I say lets do away with the Electoral College and just use the popular votes.
-Thank You
A Concerned Voter | 2 |
90b6340 | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author gives numerous characteristics of Venus' conditions and the difficulty of exploring it. The author believes that "Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" which he succeeds to explain clearly but fails to explain why it would benefit us despite its dangers.
In the article, the author explains the dangers of exploring Venus. These dangers, said in Paragraph 3, are that "a thick atmoshpere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." It also says how the clouds in Venus' atmosphere are made up of sulfuric acid, which is highly corrosive, and that the planet's surface is about 800 degrees Fahrenheit. These conditions are far too extreme for any human or spacecraft to handle and restrict us from studying and understanding the planet.
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author vaguely explains why exploring Venus would benefit us. In Paragraph 6, the author begins to talk about how Venus would contribute to our knowledge and understanding of the planet. Apart from this, the author gives no reasons why we exploring Venus would be a benefit. The author seems to get off track more than giving explanations why Venus would be a worthy pursuit. For an example, in Paragraph 7, he begins to talk about computers during the 1940s which is irrelevant to purpose of the article. Staying on track and naming more benefits would definately improve this article and help support his opinions and ideas.
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author describes the restrictions that keep us from exploring the earth-like planet Venus. Although the author does well in explaining the restrictions and how scientists are working on improving technology to enable us to explore it, he seems to get out of focus. The author also seems to fail in explaining why Venus would benefit us thoroughly.
If the author would have explained the reasons why Venus is a worthy pursuit as well as he explained the dangers of Venus, this article would have been more supportive and persuasive. | 4 |
90b9070 | So i don't belive you should have machine in a classroomlike this because i think its unnessisary to have something that tells you about all your students instead of using it on them every day in class to find out what each other are feeling. If you are a teacher you should get to know your students better to know how they feel and what might be wrong with them.
This machine should not be aloud in schools because then if a student was upset about something it might get around and all kinds of kids might come up to them and ask what is wrong with you. I think if you want to know how someone is truly feeling you should ask them yourself and then talk about it. Instead of walking up to them why are you sad, unhappy, and loney. That would just be weird and you should talk to more class mates in schools and learn more about them to find out how they are about every day and what moods they are i most of the time.
This should show that teachers should get to know their student more and find out how they feel and what might be cosing the problem and if they don't want to talk about it then you should leave them alone. If you are wanting to know how a student is feeling you should not use a machine to find out hwo they are feeling you should ask them instead of walking us to them why are you mad.
So I say that there should not be any machine in the school that tells people on how other are feeling and what is wrong with them. It shows no human contact you just look at someone through a machine and it tells you on how they are feeling. You should get to know your students better. | 3 |
90bba6c | Driverless Cars coming can seem like a big shock or disappointment to the generation, but it also could be just the begining to a great new advention. The Driverless Cars are safe for the environment, helpful for teen drivers including completly new drivers
and also can prevent less accidents from happening in the future.
Pollution and the ozone layer being destroyed is a huge problem for our Earth to this day. Cars give off alot of gases causing this pollution in our atmosphere. Driverless Cars could be the stop to all of this pollution happening all around us! Now this is something that you can't just say "Heck no i dont want to ever have a car like that!" The Driverless Cars can help save money that id coming out of your own pocket while also helping our environment.
Although driving a car that is able to drive itself can have its negative effects its can also be very helpful when it comes to the safety of yourself and the people who are also in the vehicle along with you. The Driverless Cars have special touch features that make sure the driver is in fact keeping hold of the steering wheel. Having this feature avalible on a car can be very helpful for careless drivers who do not keep hold of the steering wheel. Also having the ability to to steer, accelerate, and brake themselves can be a great way to warn the driver when roads ahead require human skills like navigating through work zones, around accidents, and going threw difficult traffic.
Being able to have control over your own vehicle and also your vehicle having control over itself can be an extraordinary way to teach new drivers how to operate a vehicle. The Driverless Car can be a perfect way to teach teens getting their licences or permits the proper ways to properly operate a vehicle. The Driverless Cars are able to stop themselves when coming close to hitting an object; this feature can be best used for teens just in case they get carried away and start to loose control ove the vehicle. Antilock brakes and drivers assistantwill be helpful when learning how to break at the appropriate time and also having assistance if something goes wrong in the mense of your driving.
Although the Driverless Cars seem strange and unusual they can be very helpful and useful to our generation by helping teens learn how to properly operate a vehicle, saving the planet from pollution and the destruction of our ozone, and also creating a safe environemt for all drviers on the road. | 4 |
90c8486 | My Position on driveless cars,I am all for it. In my opinion I think driveless cars would be a great idea. Just imagine a world where no one needs to spend there money on cars. Also imagine a world were there would be barley any car crashes,less acciedent deaths,and aslo more relaxation when driving. That sound like a pretty good world to me.
Driveless cars would be a good idea beacuse it will give the future a terrifc public transportataion system. Also the dirveles cars would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer alot more reliability than a bus. Driveless cars would drop the killing rate in the world. I say that because there are alot of car accidents that happen where some people dont make it. Inside a driveless car there would be special touch sensors to make sure the driver keeps hold of the weel,GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vechicle is an danger to keep the driver alert,aslo the driveless car would announce when the driver should be prepared to take over the wheel.
The driveless car would be a great, and safe improvement to the future. Automakers are still continunig their work to make the driveless cars to reach all limitations for them to be apporved. In my opinion driveless car would be excilent! | 2 |
90c9963 | The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers very well.
He includes everything that the planet itself would benefit from it and the humans on earth.
He explains what evidence we could find, what we could explore and what may be out there that we do not know is in existance.
In paragraph 3 he says, " these conditions are far more extreme than anything humas would encounter on earth".
This shows that if we were able to land on Venus and actually get to explore than we could possibly figure out why Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our Solar System.
We could also explore the additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes on Venus.
In paragraph 4 it says that Venus may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our Solar System.
This just proves the authors point more that studying Venus is a worhty pursuit despite the dangers because we could figure out how Venus was/is much like Earth and what they had/have in common. NASA already knows that there are still some features that are analogous to those on Earth such as a surface of rocky sediment, valleys, mountians and craters.
So by studying Venus we could know more in depth about these analogous features.
NASA has gone as far as finding substitutes for landing on the planet so we can still explore it.
This just goes to show how important it is to study Venus.
However doing so our research and evidence would not be as sufficient as it would if we could land on the planet.
If we did not land on the planet we could not collect samples of rock, gas, take close up photos, etc.
So in conclusion, it is very important that we study Venus not only because it is the most Earth like planet out there after Earth itself but also because it would bring much benefit.
It would bring benefit to the planet itself, but also to humans on Earth.
We are curious about what could be out there that we have not yet to explore.
Studying Venus would give us the answers we need and would meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. | 3 |
90cbd8a | If I was discussing the Face with someone and they thought it was created by aliens I would tell them that they have lost their mind. There is no such thing as aliens. They are just a myth. If aliens were real don't you think they would have came down to Earth and taken over? I mean they probably have the power to do it. If natural landforms can be created on earth why can't they be created on Mars?
It was even said by Garvin that it reminds him most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. It was probably just a mistake that happened when something ran into it. Just cause it looks like aliens did it doesn't mean they did. It is possible for a human to do it. But when there are no such things as aliens it just means that something ran into it. There are all kinds of thing flying around in space. He/she needs to think of the logical side and realize that something just ran into it
I was surprised when i heard about the face. There may have been an acient civilization on Mars and we just don't know about it. We didn't have telescopes that would see that far until i don't know when. But when the dinosaurs were around there could have been an acient civilization. And isn't Mars the planet that has the most wind? Maybe we can't find anything that they left behind cause the wind may had blown it away.
Now people are going to start saying that the Ancient Civilization was aliens. But it could have been people that, after the dinosaurs, died moved here. Some people believe God made us by the sand of the earth. And some believe that we evolved from monkys. But no-one knows for sure. Our ancestors could have been living on Mars and we moved here cause this place is better. We haven't found anything that would support my theory but it is possible. Maybe they burned all the documents so we wouldn't know the truth. And science always says that creatures adapt to their new enviroments, so why can't we. Most likely we created that on accident and we left it when we moved here
Some people may disagree with me and some may agree with me. But i have my theories and they have theirs. My theory may be wrong, but that doesn't stop me from believing it. Their theory is probably wrong, but i don't know that. They could be right and i could be wrong. Or I could be right and
they could be wrong. But i have some really good points. Aliens aren't real. We could have created that and left it their. We could have originally been from Mars. Who knows? Because I certainly don't. | 3 |
90cc6f8 | It is important to know how a student is feeling. So, Yes the use of FACS (Facial Action Coding System) in a classroom is valuable.
Facial Action Coding System allows us to weigh different units to identify mixed emotions. Its a simple process that allows us to classify six basic emotions; happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,and sadness. Those emotions are associated with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. The text states "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D model of the face ; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles."This is called an "action unit". Individuals often show varying degrees of expression, using FACS the new emotion recognition tracks these facial movements .
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System is esential because it can detect how other people are feeling, even when hiding their emotions. The system can recognize the subtle facial movements and mixed emotions. With this system we can get a better understanding of students and more. | 2 |
90d13f9 | Today i will be talking about some good reasons to join the program seagoing cowboys. i will also be trying to get people to sign up for it. I think it would be a great idea to sign up for it.
Here are some reasons why youu should sign up. You could help people out by going and helping with the food supplies, horses, cattle, youn cows, mules,and more. It would be doing a good deade too.
Another good reason is it might be a opportunity that you may never get to take again or if you wanted to try it too see if you like it.
If you are 18 though you could be drafted for military service so if u ever wanted to be apart of the military service it would be a good idea to sign up. Another good reason is if you wanted to just go and look at some new places this would be a good idea because they travel a lot and make a lot of trips.
Going on trips like this to places that need help because they just got out of worl war ll can make you see how much more help thses people need then you do. Another really good idea is that if you ever wanted a chance to help out with animals and stuff and never got a chance to this would be a good idea since they help out with all that.
In this essay i was trying to get people to sign up for seagoing cowboys. I hope the reasons i gave you was helpful enough for people to see that it would be a good idea to go and help out all the people that are in need and to help out with the food and animals and stuff. I hope some of you who read this will sign up. | 2 |
90d5310 | What do you think about when you think of the future? Do you think that driveless cars would be the end result of being safe? Driveless cars are not safe because it makes people lazy, gets rid of all driving laws, and technology isn't always as great as we think it is.
The world is already lazy, so why would you want to make it more lazy? We already have machines, computers, and phones doing everything for us. Machines make everyday things but people get paid so much for pressing a button. Computers do everything for us. Phones answer all our questions. Now cars are going to be driving themselves. And what are the people going to do? Sit back and watch. Then all we will be doing is having everything do it for us and we do nothing.
Not only will the people be lazy, then there will not be laws like there is today. What is someone gets hurt? Who are you going to blame it on? People do what they do and how they do it for a reason. If people want to drunk drive and drive high then they should be punished for the bad things they do and not have a car doing everything for them and be as if it's a way out of trouble.
Now that there isn't much laws and we have robots doing everything for us there is only one thing we depend on. That is technology. Technology isn't the greatest. Have you ever got mad while being on a computer or a phone? Why is that? It's because technology didn't work as well that day. What are you going to do when you're in a driveless car and it decides to just stop? You're going to get hurt. Now you're hurt and no one is reliable because we thought technology was the greatest thing.
All in all, driveless cars are not safe for today's society. They are not safe because it makes people lazy, laws will be cut in half, and technology doesn't always work. We're here to make something of our lives and not have technology do everything for us. So go out and have a life. | 3 |
90d716e | Some cities are making themselves car-free. Like in Vauban, Germany; Paris; Bogota, Colombia; and even the president of the United States is trying to "curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 29). In Vauban, Germany residents of a community are "going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: the have given up their cars" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 1).Some advantages of limiting car usage is people are happier without cars and it promotes the alternative transportation and reduce smog.
The first advantage of limiting car usage is that people are happier without cars. "The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. It has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city, according to Mockus, the city's mayor" (Selsky, Paragraph 27). "As a result, 70 pecent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,"" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 3). "It was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without cars in this capital city of 7 million" (Selsky, Paragraph 21). "Vauban, completed in 2006, is an example of a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to separate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a movement called "smart planning""(Rosenthal, Paragraph 4). Finally "the rise in cellphones and car-pooling apps has facilitated more flexible commuting arrangements, including the evolution of shared van services for getting to work" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 35).
The second advantage of limiting car usage is that it promotes the alternative transportation and it reduces smog. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city"(Duffer, Paragraph 10). "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog . . . [The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known os one of the most polluted cities in the world" (Duffer, Paragraph 14). "millions of colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams" (Selsky, Paragraph 20). Also "the number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and dropped speadily thereafter.... As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 32). And "people who stopped car commuting as a result of the recession mat find less reason to resum the habit" (Rosenthal,Paragraph 36). But finally "Mine (19 and 21) have not botheres to get a driver's license, even though they both live in places where one could come in handy. They organize their summer jobs and social life around where they can walk or take public transportation or car-pool with friends" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 39).
And those are the reasons why some cities are making themselves car-free. People are a lot more happy with no cars as said from Elisabeth Rosenthal ""When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way". And also because people are trying to promote the alternative transportation and reduce smog, thats why Paris "enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (Duffer, Paragraph 10). So what do you think should citites ban driving? | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.