essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
6efab09
|
What would it be like to study something interesting but has too many challenges? Scientist today are attempting to travel to Venus our closest planet to us. There is just one problem. The challenges Venus has makes it extremly difficult to travel there but that is not stopping them. The author of the text was able to supprot the idea of studying Venus is worthy of a dangerous pursuit well by giving information on how Scientist could gain knowledge, scientist has solutions to withstand the environmentand the closest planet, and even by adding the point on how people might encounter similar experiences.
The author was able to support the idea well by stating the knowledge that could be gained from this experience. Venus is similar to Earth in many ways. Scientist want to discover if Venus was ever like Earth but they can not figure that out from a distance as said in the text, "...reasearchers cannot take samples of rocks,gas, or anuthing else, from a distance"(6). By the author pointing this out he was able to support the idea because he gave a valid reason on why they should study Mars. By saying they can not study Venus from afar he is able to give people a reason. People usually want a reason to do things and it has to be good. So by the author providing one he is able to persuade scientist that they should take the risk if they want to learn more about Venus. By including this he did well with supporting his idea. Another way he did well with supproting his idea is by providing information that there are solutions to Venuses challenges.
Another way he did well with supproting the idea is by stating solutions to Venuses challenges. NASA has been abel to think of ways to study Venus and it does show good results as in the text it says, "....some simplified electronice....have been tested in a chamber stimulating the chaos of Venus's surfave and have lasted three weeks..." (7). By providing solutions it convinces people that they might have a shot at one day exploring Venus up close. He did well with providing this because people worried about the conditions Venus has which makes it dangerous. The author was able to calm does worries because scientist are now trying to figure out solutions. So by providing the solutions he did well with supporting is idea. A thrid way he did well with supporting his idea is by commenting that this experience would be helpful in the near future.
A final wel he was able to support his idea well was providing the point on how human kind would gain experience if they over came these challenges. Human kind will always be curious has said in the text it staes, " ...human curiosity will likely leas us into many equally intimidating endeavors" (8). People will always be curious and it would sometimes lead into challenges they must overcome. By the author pointing that out he is basically saying curiosity gets the best of people and how in this situation curiosity should get the best of them.They would be gaining experience on which they can use in another sitaution. He did well with including this because this could help motivate the people on wanting to study Venus for the experience and for the knowledge they could obtain.
The author did well with supporting his idea on studying Venus is worth the pursuit despite the dangers it has. He provided points on why they should explore it he provided solutions on peoples worries on the challenges. He even provided a little motivation on which they can gain experience from studying Venus. So once again what would it be like to study something that has many challenges to overcome?
| 4 |
6efb0f2
|
Exploring Venus is one of are closest or second planet form our sun and one of the brightest one in the solar system Nasa had a compelling idea as doin research on the plant called Venus now considering Venus being so close to our sun the maybe had issues about three decades ago by traveling around a couple kilometers.
We had a thick atomosphere of 97 persent our solar system getting that close to a planet like Venus or mercury they way and how close to the sun they may of been would be extream hot heat that would be coming of form the sun the it could burn now i don't no of we hot/heat proof suits or what not but it sure is a crazy thing but intstead of not completeing that then Nasa would need tooi send drones that would be buid for temps like that and in those certain situations.
Now scientists are even going futher of the grid as move it too the next level of being able too visit sister planets and what not to make them liveable in time for when it has to come to certain situations like our planet starting over as taking us to a new one but the conditions of plantes always have a crucial consideration of giveing long frames in space travel the and the vaule of returning but there has been both of having more and more scientifically speaking as which the fahrenheit around 170 degrees that would be very toasty for sum of us if we landed on the platet in those tempatures to become of those standards.
| 1 |
6efef30
|
I think we can keep it, But improve it. Like some people do not want to just vote for a slate they want to vote for a president. How about making that happen that's a easy one. Lets look at some of the other side why are they against it. Remember what happen in the 2000 fiasco election, so much stuff went wrong with that one. How about what happened in 1960 in louisianna, when nearly succeed in replacing the democratic electors with new ones who oppose for John F. Kennedy a vote for Kennedy would never actually got that vote.
What if that happens again? Thats a hard one we can improve the stuff like vote on a piece of paper and put it in this huge box and mail that huge box to someone who can talley up the votes so he can get them or something like that. how can we improve the system in a way everybody can join like a website or a likely matter. The president votes only need 29 electoral votes to win. Why not everybody votes not electoral votes.
It can be argued that the Electoral college method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for candidate who has no hope of carrying thier state Democrats in texas, for example or Republicans in California. The aviods the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of votes and cast. What if we do it like we did it back then wouldn't that be easier then doing it the hard way. instead of having a no region have everybody vote.
Would you include the others since they might feel disenfranchised I know I would, is there no regard for the other states. Is there appeal for a unlikely to be a successfui president. The winner-take-all program how is that working? It is form on a method of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates. For Example in 2012 election to focus thier campaign efforts on the toss-up states. If you can change it how would you and why?
| 2 |
6f01026
|
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. I agree with this suggestion because I feel that studying Venus could help us find out if there was once life on the planet, considering it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. I know this because the article states, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth". This means that their could possibly have been life and human-like creatures just like us.
Although it is a difficult planet to study, scientists find it interesting that there is a planet similar to Earth in many ways. In the article, the author states, "Furthermore, recall that Venus could sometimes be our nearest option for planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel". This supports the authors suggestion furthermore because although Venus is a dangerous planet, it is sometimes our nearest planet, which means it would take a shorter amount of time to get there. Not only would this be a wonderful planet to explore, but humans are also very curious to find out what is on the planet Venus and what it has to offer. I say this because the article states, "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors".
In conclusion, I feel that there are many amazing things that could come out of us exploring Venus, instead of giving up because of the obstacles we are faced with.
| 3 |
6f05de3
|
People may argue that emotion reading technology should be used in school. However, using this technology will most likely not be very useful in school environments. This is due to a few minor issues along with just simple facts about how this technology is used. Not to mention the very simple and straight forward ideas of how this technology could be used in the future. So the points to make are the issues with the technology, how it is used, and how it can be used.
First of all, there is the issues with the technology. This begins with the simple idea that Dr. Huang clearly state that, "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal,"Meaning, that even he understands that not everyone has the same way of showing emotions rendering his software partially ineffective. This is with putting consideration into people simply just "looking mad" all the time when the person may just have that kind of face structure and is always happy. Meanwhile it is also stated that, "So computers need to understand that, too." Showing that even Dr. Huang knows his software has to be programmed to know all these emotions and he is pulling the knowledge he gives to the software from art-works that are not actually real human faces and sometimes are not very accurate. Leaving his software to be a whole other level of inaccurate and simply just not very trustworthy.
Next, is how the software works. The way this software works calls for computers that can run the software really well putting into consideration that schools will have to waste alot of money on these when he states himself in the article, "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile." This is not new considering schools often times find themselves having problems with how to fund things thye need let alone a software program that can read facial emotions and the computers to run this complex software. To add to this problem with using this software in school comes the idea given when the article states the context following the past idea just about how it reads muscles and how, "To an expert, faces don't lie" However, no matter how much they may code into this software the software will never truely be a professional in human emotions without being one, it will simply be guessing.
Finally, the biggest concern is how it can be used in the future. Although the author does state one way that the technology can be used in school it seems awfully useless if like said before the technology is most likely ineffective in every way. However, this technology could be used as he states, "The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive- for video games or video surgery." Which is a very valid point not to mention it will go into an industry where they will actually be put to good use unlike helping students who dont know how to stand up for themselves and ask for help. Not to mention how the information given like, "They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one." makes it sound like this technology, if possibly useful and accurate, can be put into good use if put into the hands of detectives instead. This will lead his emotion detector to basically become a new version of the already existent "lie detector" instead of a useless class tool to tell teachers when a student is bored or confused when they can simply just speak up.
Therefore, in the end the technology simple will not work properly if it is tested only on art-works and false human faces. Also, if the technology costs the amount of money that it will, then school will not be able to afford getting it anyways. Along with the the final statement that this technology will be of better use being used somewhere else instead of in schools. However, this is not saying it will serve no purpose atall in school. It is simply stating that it may not be worth the costs of rushing to use it.
| 4 |
6f08227
|
Let me clear something up for you. The picture of 1976,1998 and 2001 was not created by aliens. I know that becasue how would the aliens know how to build an egyptian pharoah. Plus the they sent to mars was just taking pictures of a landing site for viking 1's sister viking 2. The first time they saw the face was when it was all shadowy so you could barely see it but as time past by it was 1998 when they went back up to mars with oe of the vikings to take another picture and it was more clear. They had to 12 years to go back up to mars and I dont think that aliens could build it that fast, it would've at least taken more time to make a good face. Then at the year 2001 they took another picture and it was fading away and I honestly dont think that the aliens would be able to take the face down that fast and why would they have to take it down. It has to be natural because there are no suh things as aliens, because no one from nasa has ever seen one and if they would've Nasa would've told everybody that they have found aliens and that they are real. Also I know its natural because even nasa said that the face had a nose,eyes,mouth, and looked exactly like a humans face.
How would an alien know what a humans head looks like? When nasa was taking pictures the head from a red planet called cydonia was looking back at the camera. Also maybe the head only appears on different years.
| 2 |
6f109fd
|
We currently live in a world dependent on machines; becoming more and more enveloped in this idea of reliance. However, now we have reached a point where that reliance is harming us and our planet, and it will continue to do so if we don't adjust our lifestyles. Seeing as that we've recently reached that point of realization, we are starting to limit ourselves to the things that do harm our planet, including limiting the usage of cars. Living in the twentieth century almost inevitably means relying on cars for transportation. Although it may seem impossible to convince so many to pursue this act of limiting the usage of cars, it is surely not impossible, as we've seen from the recent efforts made around the world. It will take time to adjust to the drastic change, but the benefits are worth the while. A few of the many advantages include, the conservation of our valuable space, improving the quality of our environment, and allowing for the opportunity of new ideas, developments, and change.
The first of the advantages may not be the first you would think of, yet it is certainly an important one. By limiting our use of cars it would save and replenish our amount of space that we currently have available. It's not only the cars themselves that take up space, but it is also the space left for street parking in the big cities, the massive parking garages used at shopping malls, and the driveways and garages at the houses in large suburban neighborhoods. This method of limiting the use of cars as been successfully applied to a town in Germany, known as Vauban. In Vauban, '' [r]esidents of this upscale community are suburban pioneers, going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: they have given up their cars '' ( '' In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars'' ). The town of Vauban, has given up their areas of street parking, driveways, and home garages to limit--almost entirely--their use of cars. With the removal of all traces of automobile usage, some may be concerned about how they are expected to reach their desired destinations, but in Vauban and many other places preparing the follow this plan, stores will be placed '' a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway '' ('' In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars'' ). Although some may be concerned with the potential limit on their car usage, they must be reminded that the space originally used for cars will certainly not go to waste, and will be used for bigger and better purposes that will not harm our planet.
This second advantage is the one most associated with the limit put on our use of cars--the improved quality of the environment. The environment can be improved with the decrease of greenhouse gas emissions, which in turn improves the quality of the air that surrounds us. Our President, Barack Obama, has '' ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions '' ( '' The End of Car Culture '' ), but that can only be done with the cooperation of the citizens. Fortunately, that cooperation has been seen with the '' fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in American behavior '', in which '' recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by '' ( '' The End of Car Culture '' ). It is understood by professionals, that if the pattern continues, '' it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions '' ( '' The End of Car Culture '' ). Although some may be reluctant to pursue the path of limiting their use of cars, they should be well informed that by doing so, they are improvong their overall state of living by not producing these harmful properties that are being released into the air that we breathe.
This last advantage is most likely the most considerably accepted by the public, because of its simplicity on their part and the benefits they recieve from it. With the limit put on the use of cars, that allows for the opportunity of new ideas, developments, and change. The idea of limiting the use of cars has gone global, from Germany to Colombia to France, this idea is quickly becoming one widely accepted by the public and their officials. The idea of a car-free dat has sprouted from Colombia, in which the citizens of Colombia are encouraged tohike, bike, skate, or take the bus to work rather than using cars for transportation ( '' Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota '' ). The public has responded positively to these recent changes, saying, '' ' It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution ' '', which was spoken by '' Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife '' ( '' Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota '' ). Not only have new opportunities for the public been introduced, but so have new developments. The new developmets include '' [p]arks and sports centers...uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks...and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts '' ( '' Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota '' ). The citizens of various cities can also expect to see plans in which '' ' pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected networl to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions, and improve safety ' '' ( '' The End of Car Culture '' ).
There have been many advantages associated with a limit put on the use of cars, including the conservation of our valuable space, the lowering of the greenhouse gas emissions, and the opportunity for new ideas, developments, and change. All of these advantages can be fulfilled to their entire purposes, but it is a group effort as a planet. We can continue to live in the luxury of these advantages, as long as we do our part to limit our use of cars.
| 5 |
6f15dae
|
There have been many claims out there that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. This idea seem very crazy since aliens don't exist. I think the that the Face is just a natural landform.
On May 24, 2001, the day the face was discovered, people said that the Face resembled a humans face, not an alien. A few days later NASA unveiled images for everyone to see while captioning it "huge rock formation... which resembles a human head.. formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose and mouth." The landform was just formed by shadow, which means this just gives others the illusion that it's a face, but it is just a natural landform. There were no alien to create this and it is only made naturally. Many out there have created movies, books and magazine article on the Face but this is all just bandwagon, trying to just sell their products and make money out of false theories. Later on, on April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew to Mars to take more photgraphs of the Face, when thousands of people were waiting for the end result to confirm that the Face was just a natural landorm. Since people were'nt satified, Mars Global Surveyor flew back to Mars in April of 2001. With many photos take, the Face did indeed look like a human or alien face, but there are no sitings of such things.
In conclusion, all the Face really is is just a naturally created landform with shadows that create the illusion of a face of a human/alien.
| 3 |
6f1773b
|
The Face on Mars was created by natural landforms and it is impossible to have been created by aliens. First,there was no sign of alien interaction on Mars when the Face appeared. Next,it has been proven that the picture of the Face was actually a butte or mesa landform. Also, the other picture that was taken was more visual and it was 3 times bigger than the original. The Face couldn't have been formed by alien life.
One reason that proves that the Face is natural is that there has never been any alien interaction evidence on any planet. First of all,it is not possible for aliens to create a face in cement rock. Next,aliens wouldn't know what a face would look like because they wouldn't have a mirror and they wouldn't even know what they look like. Finally,if aliens were able to move rock,they wouldn't have any tools to use. Aliens couldn't have formed the Face if we don't even know if they exist.
Another reason that the Face is natural is that it has been proven that the Face was created by a butte or mesa landform. First,these landforms are very common in the American West. Next,Garvin knows that they are common because he mentioned,"it reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho."Garvin also said that the Middle Butte landform is the same height as the Face on Mars. If the Face is similar to another landform,it is most likely a natural landform.
The final reason that the Face is natural is that the first picture that was taken,isn't as clear as the newer picture. First,when the original picture was taken,it was very cloudy and difficult to see during the winter in April. This could have been mistaken for alien markings because the sight wasn't easy to see. Finally,the newer picture that was taken had a digital image 3 times bigger than the original pixel in the first photo. The newer photo proves that aliens were not around at all.
In conclusion,many people may have thought the Face was formed by aliens,but they only thought that because of the evidence they were given. The original photo was not clear so the newer photo shows what it really looked like. The Face also had similar features to mesa and butte landforms which are very common in many areas. Since there was no evidence to show that aliens were there,it's not reliable to believe. The Face on Mars is just a natural landform that formed suddenly and it can happen anywhere.
| 4 |
6f1d082
|
This technology will not be needed in classrooms. They wont be needed because a teacher wont change the way they teach just because 1 students isnt happy wih they way they teach. Another reason why they shouldnt have this new technology is just because they probably dont have the money for it. Final reason why they shouldnt get this is because it wont benifit any student. its only going to help with one thing and thats to help the teacher figure out who is bored and who isnt. Schools dont need this.
First reason as to why school should not get this new emotional expression technology is because teachers really wont care what one student thinks. The thing will say that you're bored and that their lesson sucks but teachers really wont care what you think because the rest of the class doesnt think that. They might give you extra help but they wont change the way they are teaching just because 1 student is bored.
Another reason why schools should not get this is because their budget. This will probably be very expensive and schools probably cant afford one for each class. The school should also remember that it will only do one thing and thats read emotion. It wont make any student smarter, it''ll just read their emotional expression and its not very useful. Schools shouldnt spend a ton of money on a machine that will only help with 1 thing.
Finaly reason as to why schools shouldnt get this is because this emotional expression machine isnt going to benifit any student. Its only going to read an emotion and nothing else. It wont make anyone any smarter than they already are and its just a waste of time,money, and space.
Schools should not get this new technology because it wont help anyone but the guy who created it. It'll be fun to mess around with but it wont be useful. There shouldnt even be an argument about this because its actually dumb to think that schools want to but an expensive machine that will not help anyone in any way.
| 3 |
6f1f88c
|
"Venus, something called the "Evening Star," is one of the most brightest points of light in the sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot."
In the story, "The challenging of Explopring Venus," the author suggests that studying venus is indeed a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author uses many reasons and example to support this idea. At the beginning of the story, the author states, "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."
In paragraph 2, it talks about how Venus is one of the closest planets to earth by size and density. Earth, Venus and mars are the three planets that are the closest to the sun and orbit around the sun at different speeds. Since we have differences in speed, it sometimes causes us, Earth, to be closer to Mars and other times Closer to Venus.
Because of this closesness, humans have sent spacecrafts out to land on this planet, but no one has succeeded in three decades, according to paragraph 2 of the article. They believe this is because of the speed it moves at different points. Venus also has some very dangerous features that makes it even more harder for this planet to be explored.
In the third paragraph of the article is where the features of venus comes in. This planet is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide. which is not very good for humans to be around. Also, the clouds of Venus are highly consisted of sulfuric acid. The average temperature on venus is over 800 degrees Farenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times gretaer then what we exoerience on Earth. A human would have a hard time survivng in this type of temperature. For example, in paragraph 2 it states, " Such an environment would crush even a submarine customed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals."
It takes a lot of heat to liquefy a metal on Earth, so the fact that Venus can do this with no problem, shows that a human would not survive the heat on Venus. Not even for a day. It is said that Venus does indeed have the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system.
It is said that, even though Venus has these dangerous features, there are reasons why scientist still believe in studying this planet.
In paragraph 4 it says theat the reason Astronomers are fascianted by Venus is because once upon a time, it was the most Earth like planet in our solar system. A while back, it was said to be covered with oceans and could of have forms of life living on it, just like Earth. "Today Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth," according to paragraph 4. It has a surface of rocky sediment and familiar features such as valleys, moutains and craters. These are reason why an astronomer would still want to study Venus.
Also, despite the dangers, the NASA believes there is one way to send humans to study Venus. That is for the scientist to float over the fray of venus, to avoid a good amount of heat from Venus.
In conclusion, there are many reasons why we shouldn't study venus and why it is a bad idea to send people to Venus, but there are features on Venus that make astronomers and scientist want to explore. Such as the features it has similar to Earth. In spite of this, Scientient are working on new ways that will help them get closer to Venus. For example, "Some simplified electronics made of silicon carbon dioxide have been tested in a chamber stimulating the chaos od Venus's surafec and have lasted for three weeks." Which is actually good considering all the carbon dioxide on Venus. They have also been developing new forms of mechanical computers.
These are thing scientist and astronomers are doing just to be able to study Venus because this is what they value. In my opinion, they see this as a challenge and they are working and coming up with ways to accomplish this challenge. In paragraph 8, it states, " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value , not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." This is basically saying that they don't want to just explore it because of the sights. the dangers and doubts are what push them to explore it more because they believe something like this shouldn't stop them from their travels beyond Earth.
| 4 |
6f280f2
|
The United States of America has been running on the Electoral college for a large amount of time. According to the article the founding fathers established it in the constitution as a comprimse between election and President. Unfortunately, some American citizens think they vote directly for the president which is a false statement. The electoral college system is innacurate, unfair, and is horribly balanced and desgined.
Although the electoral college system is used in every presidental election the system is unfair to voters. For instance, according to Bradford Plumer in the article "Because of the winner-take-all system in each state candiates don't spend time in states they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the "Swing States". American citizens in states such as Rhode island, and South carolina are not getting the 'good side of the stick. 'Voters in small states sometimes don't get to see a single campaign ad' says Bradford. The electoral college is treating American citizens in small areas horribly.
Alot of times, citizens cannot control who there electors vote for. Not to mention the electors are also anonymous. According to source 2 voters sometimes get confused about electors and vote for the wrong candidate. Their would be alot more better results if the citizens could trust electors with there votes. This system is badly desgined.
| 3 |
6f29499
|
Driverless cars would be good for people. I think this for many good reasons. One is because some people get tired behind the wheel sometimes. Two it would stop drunk driving. And three its giving people a break. I gave the reasons why i think its a good idea, now im gonna explain my point.
My first point is
that some people get tired behind the wheel. A tired person behind the wheel is not good. They could end up falling asleep, and them falling asleep could cause a crash. Nobody wants to be in a crash. It says in the second pargarph, "their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash".... Thats more then enough time for people to get to their destintation without falling asleep. Thats just the first reason.
We have lots of drunk drivers in the world. With driverless cars drunk drivers wouldnt have to drive. And with them not driving no one would get hurt and the wont in up in jail. Im not saying that its good for them to be getting in a car drunk im saying that they wouldnt have to drive. They wouldnt have to cause crashes cause their intoxicated. We would have less DUIs in the world with this car.
Last its giving lots of people a break. I know most people dont like to drive and they wont a break. Its helping them. You will till have to set in driver sit to pay attention but its still giving them a break. So over all i just thinks its a good idea.
With this you would keep tired people from behind wheel, drunk people from behind wheel, and you giving people a break. So its a good idea to me. Just my opinion.
| 3 |
6f30b0c
|
Facial Action Coding Sytems: Good or Bad?
People have bad days at school, whether it is from a home sitaution or just a bad grade. Being upset in school can affect your ability to preform well. This is why it is important for schools to have a Facial Action Coding System.
One reason why there should be Facial Action Coding Systems in schools is because it would help recongnize when the students emotion is low, faster so it would not affect their grade. For example, in the passage it says, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored...then it could modify the lesson." This proves that if the student can become more engaged then they will do better in school.
Another reason why there should be Facial Action Coding Sytems in schools is because it can give more insight into the student's home life. For example, if the student is having family problems you would be able to read it on their face with the coding system more quickly than through a human's eyes. Being sad could affect a student's scores and plummet their grade.
Finally, it would be smart and affective to have a Facial Action Coding System in the schools becuase it involves intense algorithims that kids could try and solve and maybe build one themselves. The system would promote science, technology, engineerng and math, which is very important. In the passage it talks about the types of algorithims Dr. Huang uses, "His new computer software stores similar anatomical inforamtion as electronic code." The coding Dr. Huang uses can be taught to students in order to further techonlogy in the world.
However, having a Facial Action Coding System could be a bad idea because it would not give student's the kind of action and discpline they would have with a human teacher. It is important for student's to build a bond with a teacher and to be able to open up to them. In the case with a Facial Action Coding System in the classroom the student's would not be able to have that bond.
In conclusion, it would be very benificial for Facial Action Coding Systems to be put in schools. They could help improve grades and give a better insight into problems a student may possibly be going through. It is very important to be able to read a student's emotion to help them academically. Everybody should push for Facial Action Coding Sytems to be installed in schools.
| 4 |
6f331fc
|
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author makes some very good points to why this type of technology would be useful for people. When teaching a class, it isn't easy to give a lesson and focus on student's faces at the same time, because eventually you'll lose your spot in the lesson while searching through the sea of faces. Another challenge that teachers face, is keeping everyone focused. This technology is very useful to teachers, because it can help them make class less boring.
In paragraph 6, sentence 5, it says, "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." This feature would be very useful to a teacher so they can change up their style of teaching to best suit the whole class. When in using this computer, teachers can find out who's angry or upset, and can focus their attention on those particular students and figure out what the problem is.
In paragraph 4, sentence 3, it states that, "By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions." As I said before, it is very hard to teach a lesson and study people's faces at the same time, so when the computer finds out who's upset, it will benefit the teacher very much. If it's something inside the classroom that's bothering them, the teacher can talk to the student about it, whether they're confused or just don't like the way they're being taught. Let's say, for example, the student doesn't like the teaching style and the teacher talks to them about it. The teacher then changes what that student doesn't like and in turn there is an increase in the willingness to participate in class.
When it comes to being confused in a high school classroom, most high school students don't want to ask for help because they're embarrassed of what their peers may say. They then don't know what to do for school work and assignments, and in turn, they get a low grade. But with this computer, it can give the teacher information on who's having trouble, and they can either slow down the lesson or help that person individually.
In conclusion, these computers are extremely valuable. Not only to the teachers, but to the students as well, because it can help teachers differentiate who's happy, sad, angry, confused, or bored, and if the students are happy in class, they are more willing to participate. Better participation equals better grades. It's not a teachers job to make everyone happy, it's to teach a class, but if some of the students are unhappy and it is effecting their ability to learn in class, than this computer is the perfect way to help everyone out.
| 4 |
6f33e1d
|
The Facial Action Coding System is a new technology that helps know the emotions the person is feeling. This new technology can even identify emotions from a painting as old as Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa. This technology can also identify when there are mix emotions and when one is faking or lying about it. It all happens by how the muscles of our face move which show a specific emotion or more. The Facial Action Coding System is indeed very valuable because it could help a speaker's performance, performance in the arts, and to know the truth.
This new technology could help a speaker's performance by knowing how he is doing. If the speaker is reading off a long paragraph and the listeners are "paying attention" but in reality are thinking about something else then the speaker would know. He would then be able to involve the listeners in his speech, make eye contact or do whatever to get thier attention back. This could benefit teachers in a daily lesson to know how good or bad they are doing at explaining things. It could help when preparing for the end of the semester test and then the teacher would know what to focus on. This could also help when student's are giving speeches infront of the class. They would be able to know if they are doing a good job or not and how to do better in their speech to get a better grade.
In theater you have to act as a different person and you have to get into there position in whatever situation they are in. You can't just read the lines and expect people to enjoy the play. You have to be sad when your best friend died or scared when some is chasing after you. All of these are emotions that the teacher would expect performers to perform. This is why the Facial Action Coding System would be valuable to better the perfomance in arts. In paragraph 9 the author states "moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them." This means that the new technology can make those fake emotions into more realistic for actors who need to seem like they are actually scared, sad, worried or feeling any other emotion.
Furthermore in paragraph 8 it says "these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful." This means that the new technology could help know if the emotions public people are showing is actually truthful or not. If they are faking to be sad about something tragic but in reality they aren't then that would show everyone who they really are. Even though this is invading people's personal opinion and space, it would help to know the truth. This could also cause problems in the world of politics but it's better to be honest than to lie. Everyone deserves to know the truth about politics and what they really think so it would not hurt to know the very truth.
Don't you think that it's better to be honest with yourself and everyone else then faking things? This new technology Facial Action Coding System would helping with that. It could help a speaker's performance by knowing if they are explaining it right. It could help in acting an emotion different from what they are truly feeling. Lastly, it could help with knowing the whole truth about politicians and there way of showing they think about certain things. These are only three reasons why this new technology would be valuable.
| 5 |
6f371e5
|
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it talked about on how Venus is a worthy pursuit to explore but it has a great danger that it presents for the reason that theres procaution to take before going to Venus.They would have to see how the oxegen it gives out and also to see if theres anyone living there such as humans or creatures or animals . Another thing they would have to worry about visting Venus is the way its planet gives out enegry,tempature,"impediments such as erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes,and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface"(3)
The author explained on this article on how Venus would help us to find new planets that we are able to live at and to also grow and expand the human population in different planets.In Venus they also believed that we are able to explore new expirements.The author explained on paragraph 4 that " Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life,just like Earth." This short pharse that the article has it explains on how there can be life in this planet that theres humans or some type of people who we still have not seen yet. The author also explains on how he considers Venus as a "twin " of earth that theres water at venus and maybe be oxegen at Venus also . Venus is the closest planet to earth .
There is also dangers to seek a new planet. Theres alot of procautions to go to new planet . It says in paragraph 3 that " A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon diocide blankets Venus.Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." This part of the paragraph it explains that if we did go to this planet the heat would be so hot that i believe that we will melt the second we get there . It has a great danger of death if we do go to Venus and its a risk to the people who are still studing Venus.Venus has the hottest tempatures for the reason that it goes a fast rate around the sun so it keeps hot all around its planet. Its also a great danger for the reaosn it has additional impediments such as valcanoes ,earthquakes,lightning strikes .(3) All of these inpediments we will have to see before going to Venus.
All of these explains its reasons on why we should and should'nt go to Venus.For all of these reasons i believe and the author too that we should start studing Venus becuase it is worthy pursuit. What the article says that they may be new chances on finding new areas and explore new things that may benifet us in the long run . Theres a chance on finding new humans and new type of cures and to be able to find new types of examples .We have noted that theres water in Venus and that there heat and we see that Venus is close by our orbit and it the closes to Earth . But we should not stop seeking new things to explore we should let the human mind to knowlege even more that we should not stop for danger situation that we should risk and hope for the best . For the reason that theres even more things that
we havent seen with our eyes.
| 4 |
6f37696
|
In the article, the author implies the idea that studying Venus is a worthy endeavor despite its many dangers. By using examples, descriptive details, and more, the author supports this claim very well.
The authors does many things in this article to show the relevant danger that the planet Venus presents. They did this by using factual information at the beginning of the article. For example, in paragraph 3, the author states that "a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere". This example show the evident danger that Venus holds. Another example of the author showing the dangers of Venus is the author states, "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit". This being another example of how the author shows the dangers of Venus.
Though, on the other hand, the author also gives the idea that Venus is worth exploring despite all of its dangers. One example being when the author says, "astonomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Eath-like planet in our solar system". This shows that the author believes that Venus is a worthy planet to be explored despite the danger it holds.
Another example of how the author supports theri claim is that they used factual information in the article. An example of this is in paragraph 5,where the author states, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray...at thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans". This is one of the many factual statements throughout the article that shows the support of the author's claim.
The author also says this statement at the end of the article saying, "Our travels on Earth and beyond should be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imaginations and innovation". This shows that the author also believes that Venus is worth exploring because they give their own opinion about the future expeditions of man and how they should forever expand exploration. In conclusion, the author support their claim that Venus should be explore despite its evident dangers by using factual information, personal opinions, and descriptive details about the exploration of Venus, showing that they believe it should be explored because of the challenges it presents.
| 4 |
6f37bf2
|
There could be a day when we can use a device to identify human emotions. According to professor Thomas Huang and professor Nicu Sebe they both have collaborated and established a software where computers can recognize human emotions. This type of technology could not be helpful to teachers or any person who would want to see an emotional experssion of a person. Teachers should not even be bothered attempting to use the Facial Action Coding System to identify there students emotions.
Us humans are very fasinating we have an instint when someone is sad, mad or happy. In the article it tells us "You can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the looks of there face."(P.5) The text itself even says that we can tell when someone is feeling the way they are by the looks of there face, we do not need a computer to detect someones feeling's.
Teachers know there students they see them everyday for a long period of time, they most likely are not going to be close to them but some students do become close to a teacher. In the text it says "Each expression is compared against a neutral face."(P.4) The author is telling us that everytime they do a emotinal expression they compare it to a regular photo. How can that show what people are feeling? In most cases most people have a neutral face when they are sad, mad or happy, they are this way because maybe no one taught them how to express their feelings. So how can you really know how that person feels?
All in all teachers are good the way they are, they do not need to dectect there students feelings. Although it would be nice to use it and come across it but teachers can ask how that person is feeling themselves.
| 3 |
6f38206
|
Is it a good idea or a bad idea to join the Seagoing Cowboys Program ? There can be good things to do or bad thing to do in the Seagoing Cowboys Program. It's a good idea to participate in the Seagoing Cowboys Program because you can help people in War world 2, you can go on adventures, and you can go to different place.
First, if you participate in the Seagoing Cowboys Program you can help people in World War 2. However, some people may say that people in the Seagoing Cowboys Program may go undercover to go help the bad guys. But, the good guys can help the americans win the war. They can help the americans win the war for peace. This shows that if you join, you help win the war.
Second, if you join the Seagoing Cowboys Program you can go to unigue places. However, some people may say that they don't like to go places. But, if you do you can go to places you never been to before. Another thing is that you can see different and crazy things at these unigue places. This shows that you never know what you see at these unigue places.
The Last thing is, if you join the Seagoing Cowboys Program you can go and expericance an adventure. However people may say that they don't like to go on adventures. But, if you do, you can expericance some wild action on your adventure. You can experiance some challeges on your adventure. This shows that you can be a person that likes adventures.
If you join this program, you can help people in World War 2, you can go on an adventure, and you can visted unigue places. So you should really join this program.
| 2 |
6f38e1a
|
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author points out that astonomers are fascinated by Venus because in may well once have been the most Earth-likeplanet in our solar system. Addtionally, the article also says that NASA has one particulary compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. Finally, the author points out that NASA is working on other approaches to study Venus.
Astronomers are looking for evidence that Venus have the same characteristics as Earth. In the article, it says that, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediments and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." This part of the article proves that it can be safe to go to Venus because the astronomers have an idea on what the surface of the planet looks like.
NASA is looking for a way to send humans to Venus without putting their lives at risk. In Paragraph 5, the author points out that, "NASA has one particulary compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy condition, but survivable for humans." This shows that it would be hard to land on Venus because of the surface. It would be really hard to not to destroy the spacecraft.
Finally, 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 condition." This quote from the article is telling the reader the NASA is trying to prepare in case they are in bad situation where the people in the craft are in danger.
In conclusion, in "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. From the dangerous surface of Venus, to protecting all the passengers in the spacecraft.
| 4 |
6f3bcc5
|
Why do you think aliens created it? Aliens did not create this it is a natural landform. The face breaks and gets more real each couple of years. If aliens created this then they couldn't of had NASA's Mars Global Survey spacecraft reveal the Face of Mars , it is a mesa. A mesa is natural so therefor it has to be a natural landform. I think it is real because they got a lot of facts about the mesa and if it was fake they couldn't of gotten facts on it. They seen a image and the note said it was a human head. Now if it was created by aliens and then it couldn't be a human head. I think it is real and so should you. Believe what they say becaue it is real and they are not making it up. This mesa was not created by aliens. Aliens are not even real in the real world. So believe what they say because i think it is real. If you dont think it is real then see if you can find facts about maybe even more facts than they found. If you cant find more facts then them it is obviously not true about it be created by aliens.
| 2 |
6f3bdb3
|
When you were younger about 15 or so didn't you always want to drive? Well for the next generation that dream will be snatched no longer willl they get to experince driving.I am against the building of driverless cars.There are two reasons I am against driverless cars. First off it takes the fun out of driving. Secondly its dangerous.
To begin with driverless cars take the fun out of driving. No one wants to sit inside of a car and do nothing. Getting your driving liscense is like a new found freedom, how would you feel if immediatley after getting your liscense instead of driving yourself you were getting drove around? no one would want that. which is why i am against driverless cars
Also driverless cars are dangerous. They are ran by computers which from time to time do malfunction. Companys are putting entertaintment features in the car which distarcts the driver if he needs to take over the wheel. Another point brought up in the essay is that whos to blame when the driverless car runs into another car. An incident of that nature would cause the blame game. manufacture wouldn't take credit and neither would the driver or should i say copilot. Also computers can be hacked. Say the president was in a driverless car and someone wanted him dead it would be very easy for them to hack his car and send him off a cliff.
In conclusion, Driverless cars should not exist because they can cause conflict and because they are boring
| 2 |
6f3dc33
|
The authors suggustin that we should study Venus is worh it even though it will be really hard to get anyhing back from there becasue there is only drownes that could go so that they can pick up rocks"safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on good "
conditions becasue most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense almosphere " even though we are able to have drownes go there we wont be able to bring any of them back with rocks or some air from that planet. The other reson for them would be that they would have to send real people to go and get some samples but that would be to dangerus
"scientist seeking to conduct a through mission to understand Venus would need to get up close". despite being hard for them to try and study Venus. The authors suggetion on the story is very help full i can see why some peolpe would like to keep on going with there owm this time. even though people might not want to look any closser to Venus i belive it would be alot helpfull if we learn alot more of what is out there in space.
| 2 |
6f470e8
|
The face on mars is not caused by aliens, that is upcerd. Aliens wouldnt make a face on mars because their is no such thing of them doing so. The face you see on mars is just a detailed rock formation that formed by natural causes, and also the eyes, mouth, and nose are just shadows caused by the formation.
Aliens would'nt accure on mars to make a mark, if they were real they would be much farther then mars. This landform has been their for over 18 years so the odds are not aliens but erosion on the planet mars. Back then itwasnt seeable but now it is due to these erosions. If their were alians that made the formation People would've already be talking about the alien sightings.
This is why the formation was not made by aliens. Also any aircrafts, small shacks, or airplains would be able to be seen in the picture due to the pixels in the camera. The camera would be able to see anything that goes on mars. All of the details that you see is just shadows from the rock That makes it look like it has eyes, a mouth, and a nose, and thats why the face is a natural land form and not made by alens.
| 2 |
6f47cd6
|
Driverless cars are an innovation to the 21st century that have been dreamed of and worked on for many decades.
Many people have dreamed of driverless cars but couldn't share their dreams in a tangable form because the technolgy to make these futuristic automobiles did not exist at the time, but just recently this has changed.
There has been much debate on driverless cars with many skeptics.
My positon on driverless cars are that the automotive and technology industries should merge together and share their ideas to embrace this new form of transportation many people have been dreaming for.
Not only would driverless cars be more convenient but would aslo be much safer.
All drivers have human error but if there was to be and an intelligent, automonous computer driveing there would be little to no crashes.
Fully automonous vechicles are still many years away, but laws of many states prohibit testing of driverless vechiles.
These laws are causing the consumer to wait longer because companies need important development testing to be conducted in order to improve and devlop these cars.
Driverless Cars have many imortant and reliable senors have been put strategically on the cars to maximize efficency.
For example Google's modified Toyota Prius has position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel and a rotating sensor on the roof with many other senosors.
The sensor on the roof is the Dubbed LIDAR and is one of the most important one.
The LIDAR makes a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings. This allows the car to see all of its surrondings unlike the human eye which can on see one direction.
Driverless cars are coming to the marketplace and the consumer needs a relible and well tested car but with laws in place companies will not be able to devlop and test their cars to the best of their ablities.
I am completely for driverless cars for a more convenient and safer future and driverless cars are a step to that dream.
Thousands of people die in horrific crashes each year and to limit progress of trying to make the roads safer is just wrong.
| 3 |
6f4a57d
|
Imagine a World where the people didn't have a say in electing for a president. People would be living a life where they can't have a say in the goverment and who runs the goverment. This would be the life of millions of people if they were to remove the Electoral College. There are many reasons why it is better to keep the Electoral College because it can avoide run-off elctions, it will make certainty of outcome, and not having one region to elect a president. Having an Electoral College can change the fate of the people and all the states.
To begin with, run-offs elections can happen if there is no Electoral College, which can be a major problem if it can not be handled correctly. "For example, in 1968 Nixon and Clinton in 1992 both had only 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College." With run-off elections there is pressure when no candidate wins a majority of the vost cast, which causes a huge problem when electing the president, but with the Electoral College it reduces the complication making it easier to see the winner. Electoral College helps to provide a clear winner rather than making it difficult. It makes the run-off election process simple.
Secondly, the Electoral College makes sure that there is an outcome. "In the 2012's election, for example, Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney." This means that popular votes have some sort of outcome because it helps the electoral votes go up, but not all the time will the percents be the same. The electoral votes is what is used to decide the president.
Lastly, the Electoral College requires the runner ups to have a multi-regional appeal. This is done because no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. For example, Romney was favored by the South in which he gets his electoral votes, but he cannot only count on the South to win the election he also needs to convince the other regions. (North, East, etc.) Trying to convince the other regions is difficult, but the outcome can help change the future.
To conclude, The electoral College have a positive effect rather than negative. It can help stop the complications when there is a run-off election. Having one makes sure that there is a outcome to one side. Also, forces runner ups to have a multi-regional appeal. Keepin the Electoral college can help the United States in a positive way.
| 4 |
6f4d54b
|
cars have many flaws nd and in this day and age some are trying to get rid of them. in sime ways that could be the answer to our polution problem but cars or still too important to get rid of. limiting are car usage could be the answer. thats good cuz it gets u time to exercise,decreases our polution problem,and gives us a chance to enjoy life better instead of speeding through life withy cars.
cars today is one of our leading problems of polution and global woarming. the decrease of car usage will help the enviorment. we fill our cars with deisel fuel wich make up 67percent in a city such as paris,france with a great population. after days of near record polution, paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city.
exercise is raelly good for your health. such as walking,riding a bike, or even jogging. anything instead of using a car maybe instead of taking your car to work how about walking to the nearest bus stop. instead of taking ur child to school let them ride the bike to school.
| 2 |
6f51437
|
The so called "Face" on Mars is simply a landform created by nature. There are conspiracy theorists who like to believe that this is not true and NASA has something to hide. They also like to believe that because the images of the "Face" are not high quality photographs, that has something to do with hiding the secret of life on Mars. The fact of the matter is that there is no secret and if there was life on Mars, it would benefit NASA to share that knowledge to gain money for their space programs.
To start with, the "Face" on Mars is "...the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa -- landforms common around the American West." The first sentence in paragraph twelve simply disproves that the "Face" on Mars could be anything mire than a face. Looking a little deeper into the text, it becomes clearer how NASA has nothing to hide when it comes to the "Face". By looking into paragraph two and paragraph three it becomes clearer that NASA has looked into this odd rock formation clearly and can see that there is nothing to hide from anyone.
Another argument that conspiracy theorists bring to the table is that the original images from the Viking were blurry, making it hard to see anything surrounding this rock formation. These theorists say this believing the images were purposely blurred in order to hide something from the public. The truth is that the Viking took its photo in 1976, the MGS in 1998 and again in 2001. Being that the newest image until 2001 was the one taken in 1998, it is obvious that there couldn't be high quality pictures taken from a spacecraft back then. Also, the image taken in 2001 is way more high definition and you can clearly see that the image depicts a simple rock formation. So, the argument that the blurry image is hiding something must be false.
In conclusion, none of the theories brought up against the pure facts laid out could conquer. The theory tree was easily chopped down but the mighty fact axe, becasue the conspirers could not bring any evidence to support their argument. Also finding how every argument that NASA has nothing to hide, and that the images clearly show nothing but a rock formation is clearly supported by evidence. Facts prove that there is no way the "Face" on Mars is anything other than a simple landform.
| 4 |
6f62ee5
|
To: Mr. Senator:
I belive that we need to change the electoral college to just the popular vote. I'ts not a very good way to do an election. So I'm writng this letter to you so that your can talk about it with your fellow senators. It would be much obliged if you would do that.
One of the reasons why we shoouldn't have the electoral college is that it is not fair to smalller states. Just the state of California has more than almost all of the midwestern part of the United States. If we had our election with the popular vote then it would not be bias like the electoral college is.
Another reason why the electoral college is the right method for our election is that it is not fair our voters. Like republicans in california there is no point in voting because democrats are the majority of the state. If it was just the popular vote there vote would actually matter. We need to stop think about the state and start thinking about the people in the state.
I would be satisfied if you would take this topic to your fellow senators and discuss it with them. It's not all about the rich people that live in California that get tthe big vote, it's also about the people who work all day and barley get any pay in Alaska. We need to thin about everyone in the U.S, not just the people in the big states.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME
| 3 |
6f65423
|
The author supports this idea by introducing us to the planet and stating key points about Venus early on in the passage. In paragraph one he says, "In our solar system Venus is the second planet from our sun." and that's showing us that the author is intrested in studying Venus. In paragraph two he begins to talk about the different speeds in which Venus, Earth and Mars travel. The author states in the third sentence of paragraph two, "These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus".
As the author states in the third paragragraph, "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit..." Venus is the hottest planet in our solar system. The author has to be fully intrested in Venus to know this much about the planet. You will learn that Venus is a dangerous planet and not even metal can survive on Venus's surface. The author states in paragraph two, "Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades". Venus is so dangerous that in order to visit the planet you can't even land, you would have to float about 30 miles from the ground.
In conclusion, Venus is not impossible to visit in fact NASA is still working on getting astronauts there with different approaches. As the author states in paragraph seven, "For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber stimulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." so, Nasa is still working on getting humans there. In paragraph eight it states that, "Striving to meet the challenge presemted by Venus has value..." meaning that venus is a special place and getting humans there will be exciting. So many humans are curious of what's on Venus because it's so hot there and getting humans there would be a big accomplishment.
| 3 |
6f65bbb
|
Today cars is one of the leading causes of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. Limiting car usage would be very benificial for today and future generations.
To start off there is many advantages to limit car use. One example would be "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." In Bogota, Colombia they have a car free day every year. A lot of people participate in it and some enjoy it. With that day it lowers car mission and shows people that cars aren't nessary to have. Another example would be, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Without cars people are happier and aren't as stressed as they would be if they still had a car.
Next life can go on without cars. One example would be "Vauban, Germany- Residents of this upscale community are suburban pionners: they have given up their cars." In this community there is little to no parking spaces. The community is tightly packed together so that it is better to walk places. Not only are their car free suburbas but cars are on a decline. An Example would be, "Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and gettiong fewer licenses as each year goes by." Even in America cars are starting to decline. Teens and young adults aren't getting their licenses and dont have to get it as a priority.
The world of cars is changing and the way cities are planned is with it. The reduction of car use will help lower greenhouse gas emissions for the future generations on Earth.
| 2 |
6f6a884
|
Have you ever wanted to help somebody? Everybody should help someone when they are in need. You should always help someone even if you dont know them. Sometimes you should just do thinks to be nice and not for money.
You also get to visit other places and see unusual things. One of the dangers of going on a cattle boat though is being out in the middle of the sea so you always have to watch your back and becareful what you do. One of the good things about going on a cattle boat is when you do go on one you might learn somethings about animals.
Another thing is that you get to help people in need. Another good thing is that you might make a new friend in another country. You also might go back to that country for a trip with your family.
Its nice when your friends ask you to do something like going to another country and helping people out. When you go and help people like Luke did just think about those people and how they felt about you helping them with getting food and water. After your done helping someone in need like Luke did it kinda makes you feel happy that you did that for that person. Plus if you were to go on a cattle boat its not all just work you can also have a little fun playing tennis, boxing, fencing, Table tennis,and whittling and reading. Thats why you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program.
| 2 |
6f70a6c
|
The "Face on Mars" was a popular pop icon, it starred in Hollywood film, appearing in books, magazines,even in radio talk shows. In the article, "Unmasking the Face on Mars" there are many points in the article that would support that the face is just a natural landform. But, anyway conspiracy theorists think it could be created by aliens even though there is all of this evidence to prove that wrong. In the article there are many key points to prove the conspiracy theorists' theories are wrong and that the "Face on Mars" is just a natural landform.
To support the idea that the "Face on Mars" is just a natural landform you can look into the essay. In the article, the text states," NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling the planet, snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2,when it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face." This part of the passage starts the argument because twenty five years ago their spacecraft cameras weren't as good as the ones that were in 2001. So, the picture that came out of the spacecraft was not as clear as it could have been with a 2001 camera and with the shadows forming the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth, people thought it could have been created by alien lifeforms. To disapproved of this idea though, the text states," on April 8,2001-a cloudless summer day in Cydonia-Mars Global Surveyor drew close enought for a second look." Also the text says," Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56meter compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. 'As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size,' he added 'So, if there were objects in this picture like airplsnes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" This evidence form the ending of the paragraph ten to the end of paragraph eleven shows how much of better quality the picture would be in when taken. The final supporting detail in the passage to prove the Face on Mars is not created by is the text states,"What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a buttle or messa-landforms common around the American West" This clearly states that its just a landform called a butte or mesa that is commonly found around the American West. This evidence clearly disapproves of the "Face on Mars" is not created by aliens because we have these on Earth as well.
To conclude, the "Face on Mars" is not created by aliens and to support the text shows evidence such as high-quality pictures and comparisons to the landform to the landforms we have on Earth.
| 4 |
6f741db
|
Drive or Driverless
Driverless cars are just what the name states, cars without a need to have a driver present. This could be a big part of our futures but whether it will help our future drivers or hurt them is the main importance. Personallly I do not think that driverless cars are going to do more harm than good to our furture drivers.
Today to get your drivers lisence you have to hold a permit for one-hundred eighty days and have to pass a writen test followed by a driving portion of the test with an instructor. These conditions you have to follow to be able to drive a normal car are intense because you are being put onto a road that could potientionally harm another humans life or your own life. The precautions you have to take are endless while driving and the risk you are putting yourself in is immense.
Having driverless cars where you still have to be in control part of the time just causes an even bigger distraction especially for younger, newer drivers. You could be talking and suddenly have to stop manually and not have enough time to make it there, because you were distracted by something else.
Another reason that driverless cars have a negative effect on the future is the economy. To make a normal car cost a lot of money but to make a driverless car would cost twice that or more because of the type of technology you would need to use to make them run proporley.
Having normal cars puts your life into harms way and teens are bad enough when it comes to staying focused, being attentive,and staying cautious with normal cars. By putting teens behind the wheel of cars that uses a computer, or a controling device to run it, is teaching them nothing but pure laziness, not to focus your one hundred percent attention, and to stay alert when it comes to driving.
Driving is a very serious matter that people already abuse laws and regulations for. To give people another excuse to why the accident happened or to why they wrecked into a pole should not come from our local car dealerships and manufacturers. We together as a community need to stop the driving problems directly and not give people more advanced technology, just so they have another excuse as to why an accident occured.
| 3 |
6f74878
|
First of all,we don't need these cars because they seem dangerous and not safe to the our envirnment,and now knowing that there going to build these car are going to take a lot more money from our government and they will cost way to much just for a car that can drive itself, like why would we need these cars? See in paragraph 9 it states that the driveless cars are illegal in California,Nevada,Florida,and the District of Columbia.
Second of all, I wouldn't buy this car because of the new technology that it has and what if the wires start glitching and you crash and you die? Who's fault would it be if that had happened? The driverless car sounds cool and all but you really got to think about the defects in the car and how it effects the car runs and how it will cost to get its oil changes and how much the check ups will cost. See Toyota is a good car company but in the past some of there cars killed a lot of people and the airbags didn't work. The same ccompany is going to make more,more new car to get more money.
Third, see in paragraph 9 it states," If the technology fails and someone is injured,who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer? Thats the number 1 reason why I wouldn't buy this car is because of that question "Who's fault is it"? Whos fault is..... who fault it is, is the person who bought the car ans the person whol designed and built it, thats who fault it is.
In conclusion, the reason I wouldn't buy this car is because of the self driver and that doesn't seem to safe and it will cost way to much for that person and because of the that question "whos at fault".
| 3 |
6f7ae5d
|
I do not agree with the idea of completey driverless cars. I feel that it is way to dangerous for the people inside the car and the people around the car, escpecially if people are asleep inside the car when something goes wrong. If there is even the slightest malfunction while a person is not concious, if a sensor goes out, then it could cause an accident and possibly lead to injury or death. I like that most states have banned the testing of computer driven cars, there are still a few that have not including: California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia. What if there are accidents like said in the passage, who is held accountable? I think it is best to just stay away from the driverless cars.
In the passage, the cars that are being tested are not completely driverless yet. The passage said that the car can only do so much without a human, if there are accidents and work zones on the road then it needs a human to control it. According to the passage, General Motors has been working on things to get the driver's attention when the car needs a human, they have been developing driver's seats that will vibrate if in danger. Some of the other options that companies have considered is to have flashing light on the windshield and some other heads-up displats. Another option is the idea where they have cameras watching the driver so that they know whether or not the driver is focused on the road.
My favorite part is that most states have the testing of computer driven cars banned, with a few that have not budged yet. I think this is a great idea because if it wasn't banned or made illegal then companies and manufacturers would be testing it everyone and possibly causing accidents. If a malfunction were to happen while a manufacterer was testing the car there is no idea on what could happen especially if they do not have a human in the car. The car could swerve off of the road and hit someone or crash into a building and explode! I hope that California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia come around and ban the testing too.
I believe that there shouldn't be driverless cars, there are to many things that can go wrong during a test of it. Even if manufacterers believe that they have everything fixed with the car and release it to the public, one of the sensors could go out and your car would lose sight on that side of the car. I believe it is best that we all stay away from the production of driverless cars, especially given how many things can have a malfunction.
| 3 |
6f7c6f1
|
In the article Challenge of Expoloring Venus. the scienctist want to explore Venus despite the dangers.
Venus nickname is called the (Evening Star) because its one of the brightest points of the light in the night sky. humans have sent numerous spacecrafts to land on venus each previous mission was unmanned and for a good reason. Venus reputation as a challenge planet to study despite its proximity to us.
my claim is that Venus is a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide. the more challenging are the clouds of high corrosive sulfuric acid in venus atmosphere on the planet surface temperature average around 800 degrees fahrenheit. and the pressure is about 90 times greater than we have expericence on are own planet.
Venus has value not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself. but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally endeavors.
| 1 |
6f7f125
|
In the article, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," The author explains why it would be a good idea to explore our neighboring planet of Venus. Despite all of the possible problems that can easily arise, the author claims it is a worthy pursuit. From evaluating the article personally, I believe the author supported his argument very well with even being able to counterargue many counterclaims by stating different innovations and different ideas that can make travelling to the "Evening Star" a reality.
The author claims it is important to study Venus due to it's striking similarities to Earth. The author states in paragraph 4 that scientists believe that Venus was once the most similar planet to Earth, once believed to probably be covered in oceans and probably even supported life. Even today, it is speculated that Venus has many land masses like ours such as mountains, valleys, and craters. The author also states in paragraph 4 that Venus can easily be our nearest option for a planetary visit considering how close it is.
Although, the horrible conditions of the planet have not allowed any human made spacecrafts to land on Venus for more than a few hours before being either torn apart or simply returning. However, after this claim from paragraph 5, the author uses support from NASA to state how humans could still visit the planet, however, will have to only hover over it about 30 miles into the atmosphere to avoid getting into serious danger. The author claims that although these still are not perfect conditions, they will be suitable for humans to survive in. The author then goes on to compell the arguement that they would not be able to collect any samples or even photo or videograpghy due to it being dangerous or ineffective. He therefore states in paragraph 6 that if scientists are seeking to conduct a thorough mission, that they need to get up close and personal with the planet.
The author also states in paragraph 6 as well how many scientists take Venus as a challenge and are actually coming up with different innovations in order to tackle Venus' tough environment with a surface that can reach up to 800°F and the immense 90 times greater pressure than Earth. These technologies include mechanical parts like found in the first computer had in order to be more resistant to heat and pressure being made from silicon carbide, which when tested in a chamber that simulated Venus conditions, survived a staggering 3 weeks.
Later, in paragraph 8, the author states that being presented a challenge to get to Venus has value. "Not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us to many equally intimidating endeavors," the author states in paragraph 8. The author claims that if we are able to tackle an astonashing feat such as Venus who is our neighboring planet, then we have unlocked the key to tackling many greater challenges.
In conclusion, I believe the author supports his claims very well due to him being able to understand the dangers of the challenge. However, the author then was able to find different supporting facts and innovations that can make a trip to Venus by man possible and seem more appealing nevertheless.
| 5 |
6f7f3f7
|
Hello, I'm PROPER_NAME and I will show you why you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. if you want to go to many unique places around the world and help people in need while doing it, this is the program for you.
Bonuses of joining the Seagoing Cowboys program from the article is,'' Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China, but seeing Acropolis in Greece was special.'' Other reasons to participate is after the animals have unloaded, the cowboys would play baseball and volleyball in the stables where the animals were. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, writing, and games will also help pass the time. You will be opened up to a whole new world.
While your onboard you will have to work hard keeping the animals healthy and clean up the stables every day. You will have to know that you will have to take risks and possibly get hurt, but wouldn't you rather die or get injured helping someone than not helping them at all.
Join the Seagoing Cowboys program today, and help somebody who has lost everything in their life. You will see that this is an opportunity of a lifetime.
| 2 |
6f8353a
|
Have you ever wondered about the Face? The one so talked about, movies and books were made about it? In the late 90's, there was a picture taken of a rather human like landform. But get this
-
it wasn't on Earth! The discussion of whether the landform was alien made or a common Cydonia Martian mesa was huge, and is still fret over today. But lets get real, the possibility of the landform being alien made is surreal - with our advanced technology today, we would know!
About twenty-five years ago, an interesting picture was found with one of NASA's spacecrafts, Viking 1. From the region Cydonia of the 'Red Planet', Viking 1 had taken a picture of a large face that stretched almost two miles wide. The landform became better known as the Face. When the picture was released to public, it was a big deal. Scientists had begun to figure it was just another Martian mesa that just happened to have unusual shadows. In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars", paragraph two even states this. These shadows caused many people to assume it looked similiar to some kind of Egyptian Pharaoh. The general public, although amazed by the coincedence it had been, couldn't have ignored the sayings of a scientist, especially when all the facts come into play with the logical explanation - not aliens!
Even with the scienctists saying what was undeniably the truth, people demanded proof. Few scientists believed the chance of the Face being put there by exterestrial beings, but getting images became one of NASA's priorities. On April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia to take ten times sharper images of the Face. In the paragraph seven, you could find that thousands of people were waiting, waiting for an image that may decide what exactly the Face had been. After the image had been taking, not everybody was happy. This resulted in many suggestions as to why there was no proof of aliens having made the Face. It was winter and hazy. Reading through paragraph eight of the article, you can also find many of the excuses used to try and find proof of aliens exsistence.
With many complaints under their belts, Mars Global Surveyor went for another go. This time on a cloudless summer day. On Apri 8, 2001, they were sent in for another look at the Face. The images, taken again, did not show any proof of aliens. To many conspiracy lovers dismay, the images were rather like Earth Landforms. Instead of alien markings, they found that the Face is equivalent to butte or mesa. Even common to landforms in the American West. In paragraphs ten, eleven, and twelve, you can read through the precautions taken to find even clearer images of the Face, though nothing had changed. Without any other evidence to go off of, what could the theorists say?
Others, such as conspiracy theorists, say that NASA has found evidence of the other life forms. They may be right, stating things such as this. But they also say that NASA is withholding this information. While that may be a good idea for other people, NASA's budget says otherwise. With the information of alien exsistence out, their funds could go up a rather lot. Would it be a good idea to hold this information to the public? Especially when it will not only be informing the people, but also helping NASA discover more about our universe.
As stated the possibility of us not coming across alien lifeforms with todays technology is unlikely. With all the precautions they took to prove (or in this cause, disprove) alien exsistence, it is highly unprobable that we missed them. With the scientist, looking over the images twice, and then checking them, the answer is in lockdown. And even if we were, sharing the information is in almost everyone's best interest. If it had been aliens, we surely would have known, wouldn't we? Unless, of course, the aliens could were invisible. How about you tell THAT to the conspiracy theorist?
| 5 |
6f8372d
|
My name is PROPER_NAME, I'm a scientist at the NASA, I research and deal with science matters. I've been researching the Faces on Mars, I have so much research and I've been working on this for awhile now. So right now I'm going to be talking about me trying to convince someone that the Faces on Mars is just a landform.
Today, I'm meeting with a guy who wants to know more about these face/landforms on Mars, so today I'm going to sit with the guy and talk with him. Well the guy comes in and he's wanting to know all these things about the faces on Mars, and then I interuppted him and said, "did you know those are landforms" and he replaid, "no those are faces." So then i was like can you give me any information explain why you think those are faces and he said because I've say people saying that on the interent.
I said, "Well that's what people are saying on the internet, so it might not always be true. So here is some information that I've researched about the landforms on Mars that might make you think diffrently. There has been pictures taken of the landforms from 1976,1998 and 2001, and yes they kind of look like faces but they are landforms. NASA defends what people are saying about the faces on Mars. Yes, peple think that there is life on Mars,but how would the faces on Mars prove that? The guy then says yeah I understand were your coming from. The guy then says yes, I guess your right about them being landform. It really didn't take much convincing. Before the guy left he said Thanks. After doing all that I went ahead and did more research just so if I found more about the landforms, then I could call the guy and let him know what's going on.
| 2 |
6f88292
|
Yes, I strongly think it will be valuable to use in a class room. It could help improve assignements for kids or even improve education. It could even help the teachers out to figure out what students are bored of the same work.
The "Making Mona Lisa Smile" teachnology would be a great benifit in education. It could recognize "what students are becoming confused or bored." "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." If they could get it into schools it could improve the education for kids. Or even improve all schools graduation rate. The students would be more into doing assignements, completing homework, just by knowing if they werent into the work they had to do the computor could change it up for them.
If the education improved for future student that could lead to a better futre, better invintions. When students a bored about an assignement the computer would change it and make it more effective for the student to learn. More homework would be turned in, more assignements would be complete, school grades would go up, and the graduation rate would be way higher. And all that could be done by just changing somethings in computers.
| 2 |
6f8a68e
|
Senator I would not like to keep the Electoral College, it's not a good method, I know we are voting fir the President either way, but why can't we vote for the President right away? Instead of voting for a slate of electors to vote for us? We are not babies that can't vote for our President right away, we have common sense and are grown up enough to know who we are going for. The method is unfair and outdated, we nned to abolish the electoral college. This method is a non-democratic one, and should be overruled. It is unfair to voters because of the winner take all system in each state, canidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance at winning, focusing only on the tight races in the swing states. The electoral college is uneeded and irrational, we don't care about it an would like for you to agree with us and abolish it, if yiu do not, we undersdtand, on behalf of all the disagreeing persons to this method, join us and you will see our way of thinking, and see our way is much easier without a doubt sir and/or ma'am, have a great time, bye.
| 2 |
6f97075
|
In the first paragraph, the first sentence kind of threw me off a little bit, because when you say it like the paragraph did then it makes it sound bad knowing other people emotions. like if I was sad or upset, and I was trying to hide it,
I wouldnt want other people knowing it.
Say I was at a family dinner and something happened, then I wouldn't want the rest of my family knowing that I am upset. Yes, some of the arguments in the article can be good like, " a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." Thats great but honestly I dont think this would be the best thing in the world.
The article asks us "Does your exspression in the mirror suggest an emotion?" Of course it does, just sometimes we may not know what kind of emotion it is. Sometimes you may not be able to tell it on your face but you can definitely feel it.
Other people do not need to know what is wrong with you, rather you are upset, sad, angry or happy. If you have a smile on your face, thats great, the other person thinks your happy even if you arnt. If I want someone knowing what I am feeling, I am going to tell them. I dont just want them or some computer reading my muscles in my face and telling me what emotion I am feeling.
Technology these days are getting to be way to much. Kids don't need to be told by a computer. "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."
What if the computer messes up the facial exspression and does something "different" to try to "help" that kid, but honestly the computer detected the wrong facial exspression and changed the lesson for the kid, when he really understood it.
This is why I dont think this is such a good idea, because sooner or later computers and technology are going to be running the world and later need updated or something and mess evereything up for our upcoming generations.
| 3 |
6f9ae05
|
The Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. The problem with this is that not all classrooms have computers. This new technology would only get used every time computers are used, so the FACS wouldn't get much use. That is why I think this technology is not very valuable in a classroom.
The article states in paragraph one that FACS was developed to help humans and computers communicate. Then, in paragraph five, the article says that humans read each other's facial expressions all the time. I do not think that humans need computers to read each other's emotions if we already do it so well.
Another point to my argument is that the computer may not be able to read people's correct emotions. For example, there is no definite way of knowing Mona Lisa's emotions in her painting. Just because a computer says what her emotions are, doesn't mean that it is right. She may have been happy, she may have been faking; we simply have no way of knowing for sure.
The last point to my argument is using technology to read our emotions. Most teachers don't allow students to use electronics in the classroom. In paragraph six, Dr. Huang says, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,". To me, a student's learning is more important than them being entertained. Now, being confused is an entirely different thing. If a student is confused they should ask the teacher to explain so that they do understand.
I think this technology is not very valuable in a classroom. My biggest issue with this is the tech being faulty. If humans can read each other's emotions without much difficulty, I don't see why computers need to be able to read them as well. I don't see how that benefits anyone.
| 3 |
6f9cf41
|
I do not completely agree on the driverless car.
I think tectnology has become to big of a part in life.
We should not have to rely on tectnology for eveything.
People are becomeing to depend on tectnology whats going to happen if one day it falls?
If we have driverless cars and something happen? No matter how safe they seem are you really willing to put your life in the hands of tectnology, they might say it is perfectly save but what happens when the car melfuntions and you get into a crash?
If we keep so hevaly relying on tectnology for everthing we do we will never learn.
In the future if all these cars are driving themself and it goes out one day kids that grow up without learning how to drive because they relyed so heavly on tectnolony can not get anywhere.
I think people should stop being so lazy and forget about tectnolony for a while and start to do things on there own.
Kids that are growning up in a air like today will never learn how to surive without tectnolonly and for the most part that is really sad.
I think tectnology in grenaly is becoming more and more over powering in the world today.
Some may see that as a wonderful thing we are smart and can experiance things, but when can we lurn to start doing stuff by hand and taking control of our own lives.
If something were to hand to the driverless cars what would people do?
Are people just to sit in their houses because they can not drive themself anywhere because they forgot or may do not even know how?
I think we should not make these car or not give them to anyone.
We need to have people learing how to drive.
I remember when I was younger I could not wait to drive a car by myself, is tectnolony going to take away some of the biggest moments in a teens life?
If everything were to fall one day we need to be able to be independ and be able to live on our own and take car of our self.
We do not need cars that can drive themself we need people behind the wheel.
People will always be smarting then a mashen.
We have coment sence and can think about how to get out of sisutations as for car they do not if something were to happen cars can not think like people. I will alway feel safer with a human behind the wheel.
| 3 |
6fa2b46
|
"My fellow americans," a phrase said by many important people, like current president Barack Obama, implicates that the speaker is trying to portray a message. So I use that phrase for a reason, "My fellow americans, there has been a current movement to limit the amount of time a person spends driving." There are many advantages to limiting car use, that could make a big difference in the amount of greenhouse gases.
Take Vauban, Germany for example, a neighborhood where 70 percent of its residents do not own a car. This neighborhood follows a growing trend across the world, and is flourishing. Source 1 states, "In the United States, the Enviromental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously." This statement is a perfect example of this growing trend. If many suburbs follow Vauban's example, then the amount of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere will plummet. This will then cause the ozone to repair itself and global warming can be stopped. Source 1 also states, "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe ... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." This statistic is shocking! If the United States is responsible for a majority of the greenhouse emissions, then why has the United states done nothing to fix this. This is not the only example of this growing trend.
Another example is Paris in 2014. Due to the abundance of smog in the air, Paris banned driving cars for a limited amount of time. This fixed their problem, but Paris removed the ban after only one week. Source 2 states, "The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday." Why would France stop the solution to their smog problem. The answer is, loss of revenue. Many companies during this ban lost revenue due to not being able to deliver their goods. Source 2 also states, "Diesel fuel was blamed, since france has ... [a] tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France, compared to 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe." This is a key factor in France's smog problem, and could be stopped by making a law limiting car usage.
One influential example is Bogota, Columbia. The citizens of Bogota have a tradition called "the Day Without Cars." They have been honoring this tradition for three years straight, and other countries around them are starting to take notice of its effects. Source 3 states, "For the first time, two other Columbian cities, Cali and Valledupar, joined the event." This statement shows how much of a pressing matter smog is to normal ppeople around the world. Source 3 also states, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." A day without cars not only helps the enviroment, it also mentally helps a person. If this could lower stress world wide, then less people would suffer from stress related injuries. Source 3 states, "... and new restaurantsd and upscale shopping districts have croped up." This tradition also helps the economy and can lower the percentage of people under the poverty line by creating jobs and helping people start their own business.
Three examples of cities or countries that have, at one time, stopped the usage of cars were shown in this essay. If all of the benefits from limting car use, like strengthening the economy, are true, then why has the world not caught on to this idea and helped it flourish. This essay has shown the benefits of limiting car use, but it is up to you to make a difference.
| 4 |
6fa61fd
|
Today in the recent years car usages rates has been sky rocketing. "All of our developement since World war II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change", said David Goldberg. Ever since the gas emissions has been causing problems and polluting the air, and causing smogs. Like in Beijing, China, and other European capitals. It is also almost 50% of the green house gas emissions in Europe in car-intensive area in like the United states!
There can be a solution to this situation..... Car free days! While of the exception of plug-in cars. This helps promote alternative transportation and reduce Smog and a polluted atmosphere. "Public transportation was free of charge from Friday to Monday", "The smog cleared enough on Monday" said BBC.
Or automobiles can be banned completely. Like in the Suburbs Vauban families do not own cars and 57% of families sold their car to move in Vauban. Drive ways and home garages are forbidden generally. By this action stores are placed walking distances rather than a long distance like a highway. Cars can be allowed but only can park in only to places, large parking garages and where a car owner buys a space of $40,000 with there payment of a house! Thats a lot of money.
It is your choice would you rather be fine $40,000 for a parking space along with your house. Be fined every time you decide not to take part in the car free day to help pollution from car emissions. Or do the right thing for you,your family,your kids and your world. To help decrease the usage of automobiles. Lower the stress and air emissions.
| 2 |
6fa9527
|
In the article,"The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author suggests that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. In certain cases the author is right about his idea, but in other cases it might get to risky for humans. Venus is the closest planet to earth, but is serverly hot. "While Venus is to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely". The closer humans get to Venus, the less likely they are to survive. People may say it, "is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot", even with his being a true statement, Venus is still a very hot and dangerous planet to visit.
Some humans may disagree and agree with the authors idea, they may agree because Venus is a planet to explore not to just see photos. Humans say also disagree with the authors idea because it is dangerous and there has never benn a spaceship actually make it to Venus. "Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades". If you think it about it though the authors idea is a well thought out idea. Even though there are factors that would lead to danger, bu they also lead to satifactory like, "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system". Even though Venus is very hot, there are ways to keep human safe to at least get to slightly see it or expierence it without it getting too dangerous.
Other than it being hot on the planet Venus, there are very fasinating things on Venus. Forexample, "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." These are beautiful minerals to experience that you don't see on Earth. On the other hand, "More importantly, reasearchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distnace." Instead of listening to that, scientist are like the author they believe it is right to study Venus despite the risks, so scientist went to get up close and personal despite th risks to see the rocks and other things.
An exciting thing that NASA is working on 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." They are also looking into old technology, machanical computers. Modern computers are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions. Just imagine exposing a cell phone or tablet to acid or heat capable of melting tin. Don't let all that fool you though, because some systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant pressure, heat, and other forces.
With all of this information adn facts about how studying Venus is worthy pursuit sepite the dangers it presents, the author is stating a good idea. Reasons so that being is there are fasinating minerals, being able to expierence it just a little bit over Venus, and NASA's idea of going back to old technology to help study Venus a different way. "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." Letting humans make the decision to go to Venus is their choice, but it may be worth the dangers to be able to expierence a new planet.
| 4 |
6fad7e0
|
Are driverless cars a good idea? I think driverless cars is a good idea because it's safer, smarter, and efficient. Are driverless cars a good idea?
My first reason on why driverless cars is a good idea is because it's safer. For example Google's cars that have been driving around everywhere is has driven more than a half a million miles without a crash, and why wouldn't it be better choice since it hasnt gotten into a crash yet. Are driverless cars a good idea?
My second reason on why driverless cars is a good idea is because it's smarter. The way the driverless cars are smart is because they use sensors to warn the driver when to manuver and they have cameras all around the car to detect other vehicles, and there is this one bit of technology that is in the car that makes it a smarter choice and that is the Dubbed Lidar, it uses laser beams to detect what's around the car. Are driverless cars a good idea?
My third reason on why driverless cars is a good idea is because it's more efficient. The way it's more effiecient is because it tells the driver when they are needed to control the wheel because of accidents and other hazards can make the car crash so the person driving needs to handle the wheel most of the time. Another detail about it being more efficient is that all the driver really needs to do is watch the road while the car does driving. Are driverless cars a good idea?
In conclusion I think that driverless cars is a good idea because it's safer, smarter, and more efficient. Are driverless cars a good idea?
| 3 |
6fb25b4
|
To support the author idea I'm gonna say that the article says that Venus is a really
dangerous and interesting planet because all this things:
- On the planet's surface, temperatures average are over 800 degrees Fahrenheit.
-The atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.
-Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.
-thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth.
-Solar power would be plentiful.
-Radiation would not exceed Earth levels.
-It doesnt have easy conditions, but survivable for humans.
-Also important programmes like NASA are working on travell to Venus:
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 back to an old technology called mechanical computers
-Also he should study it because Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.
| 2 |
6fb7a97
|
The author supports this idea that venus is the closest planet to the earth, and that they want to know more about the planet venus.I think that they tried to send spacecraft to know what's on venus,and know what's going on in the planet. In the text it says that "NASA is working on other apporaches to study Venus in some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus surface."Another reason in the text is to why it's worth studying is "Many researchers are wroking on innovation that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knownledge of Venus." I do think that it is worth pursiting despite of danger because we can learn alot and also see what's going on in other planets so that
way we know what we can do to change and protect the
planet earth, and not cause much more damage than what we already casued in our solar system.With using robot and other tecololgy is better to know what's going on in Venus.
| 2 |
6fb84c0
|
Do you think it is a natural landform or a face? It is obvisouly a natural lanform! Mars has a lot going on, people wondering if there can be life on Mars or not, and now this.
First, how could there ever be life on another planet? Mars does not even have enough water for human life. In the passege "Unmasking the Face on Mars", it states, "The caption noted a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth" The reson why the rock formation looks like a face could be from rocks being inside the sand to formate the face and the rocks could have shrunken or have gone away.
Now, this face is a land form, it just looks like a face. This can happen anywhere in the world, not just on Mars. In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars it says, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural land form. There was no alien monument after all." This proves that the picture that was taken may looked like a face but was in fact, a landform, and thd cause of this face can be from anything out in the environment.
In conculsion, the "Face of Mars" is not a face, its alnd form, no faces can still be dented in a land form for that long. The cause of making this face can be from rocks, or any other thing on Mars.
| 2 |
6fb873a
|
Why did people think that there was aliens on Mars. There was a face on mars,
They think it was made by aliens, and was it aliens or just landforms.
There was a face on mars. NASA's took some photos of the face. A lot of people seem to think that it is aliens that made look like face. People knew there most be others living on mars.
Poeple think it made by made by aliens. Other knew that it was made by the first humens and to think it look like Egyptian Phareoh. Why was it there and want to know who put there and how did it get there. So did people think is was aliens or humens.
Was it aliens or just landforms. To find out that it was just landforms some people want it aliens or first humens. Some what knew what is look like them was (middle butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho). Other knew that was landforms.
What I think what it is a buch of rocks that stay there for a longtime . Here are my reason. There was a face on mars, They think it was made by aliens, and was it aliens or just landforms.
| 2 |
6fbb921
|
I do not agree that the face on Mars was made by aliens for a couple of reasons. The reason one because nobody has found life on Mars Only samples that they can never find to be true. Another reason for my disagreement is because even if there were some aliens that made that face the government wouldn't leak that information to the public because that is something they would call classified just to keep everybody from going insane. I also disagree because in paragragh seven when they flew over Cydonia for the first time on April 5,1998 they said that there was no alien monument after all. From my understanding what the last paragrah is saying is it is just a landform not created by aliens just made by land such as dirt,dust,mud or whatever is on that planet. Also in the three pictures that look like they are changing every year they took the pictures so maybe Mars has storms which causes the dirt or dust to shift or move around I mean u wouldn't say the aliens know what time the scientist take the pictures so the change the look of the face that would be outragoues. The last reason for me thinking that the face is a landform and it was not created by aliens is because it clearly states in the reading that they found out it was just a "messa brutte" which is a landform so that gives the answer right there. This is why I degree with whoever says that aliens formed the face on Mars.
| 3 |
6fc0e42
|
In my opinion, I think driverless cars could simply change the world, i don't see many negative aspects of the idea of trying to make a car that a human doesn't need to drive.
I also think that making a driverless car that needs human assitance aswell is pointless because, the driver would sit there waiting for his turn to drive and that could get really boring for the driver sitting there cautiously waiting when its his turm.
It should be driverless completely or not at all.
In my opinion, the idea of driverless cars would be revolutinizing for humanity in many ways.
According to the text, they would use the driverless cars as a taxi service, that would help in many ways when people need rides or want to get somewhere quick in a major city and not wait for a bus or train.
The biggest concern for the driverless car is the safety hazards and the laws that are set in place.
The text states that states like, California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia have limited use of semi-autonomous cars due to safety issues. A big concern is if you get into a car accident with a driverless car, who is there to blame?
In order for driverless cars to be used they would have to set in liability law changes and who would be be blamed for the accident, as it states in the text.
I am mutual for the feeling for driverless cars because there are the positives like, driving the handicap, the taxi service that drives you where you need to go, take a nap , etc. But the negatives are, driver safety for the passengers, will it be safe enough to driver on the street with other driverless cars, and will it be able to drive with this type of technolgy efficiently.
Based on the information I supplied, I think the driverless car can be a major step in the world, but it can be a very dangerous one if not handled correctly.
According to the text, Tesla announced they would have a car that could drive itself 90 percent of the time by 2016, also Mercedes-Benz and Nissan planned to have cars that can drive themsleves completely by 2020.
The road to the truly autonomous car streches ahead of us it could lead to a bright future that revolutionizes the world, or it could lead to a very dangerous one, but we grow closer to the destination everyday.
| 3 |
6fc833f
|
As of April 2013 the number of miles driven per person was down 9 percent. So that means people are starting not to drive as much, which is not a bad thing. Actually they're many advantages to limiting car usage. Limiting car usage can actually help the environment, help the emissions, and if we do limit car usage it can make cities denser as well as having some places that don't use cars. Which will be good for the world.
Transportation is really big in America. People drive all the time, were a moving country. So driving and using cars does effect our enviornment. One big thing going on is smog. One country that i can point out is Paris. Paris had so much smog that they enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of global city. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog..." according to the article Paris bans driving due to smog by Robert Duffer. Paris has more smog than other european capitals. Which is really bad because that can effect us as humans. In Bogota They are doing a program that involves banning cars for a day. The goal was to promote transportation and reduce smog which it did. So limiting car usage can improve safety and make the environment more clean.
Limiting car usage can also have beneficial implications for carbon emissions. If we created cities with pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, it can lower emissions and if the emissions are in good care then the environment will be to, "since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants." President Obama has goals to curb the United States greenhouse gas emissions. Experts say" Is a huge impediment to current eforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes..." according to the article In German suburb, Life Goes on Without Cars, by Elisabeth Rosenthal she says" Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United states. So thats pretty bad so if we limit car usage we can help fix that and maybe even have a lower percentage on emissions.
Vauban home to 5,500 residents are really taking limitation to cars serious. They may be the most advanced experiement in low-car suburban life. But they are doing really good. Other countries around the world are adopting what they are doing in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accessible, which is a good thing. Espescially for people that dont use cars, and especially if your trying to make the air more cleaner. According to In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, "Vauban, copleted in 2006 is an example of a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a movement called " Smart planing"." This is a advantage for the world because we need to have someplaces that actually dont use cars. Also Vauban can inspire other countries to do the same. Which will be a advantage.
So they're are many advantages for limiting car usage. A lot has to do with the environment like it reduces smog and helps emissions which will be better for the world. The biggest advantage for limitation on car usage is pretty much a better world and who wouldnt want to live in a better world. It can also help other places be like Vauban. They don't use cars as much and it works for them, and a lot of people should start doing that. These advantages will really help the world if we do decide to ever limit car usage.
| 4 |
6fc893c
|
Autonimous cars are a reality. Corporations such as Google, General Motors, and enigineers at Berkley have all created, to a certain extent, autonimous vehicles. A few more companies including Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan have announced their plans to have autonimous vehicles by 2020. But are autonimous vehicles really the best? Who would be responsible for crashes? Will they be as safe as regullar vehicles? Will they be able to be hacked? Even though the autonimous car is possible is it really safe?
First, how would autonimous vehicles respond to a wreck? It is clearly stated in paragraph 7 "but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills". So what happens in the event of a crash? One car wrecks and it causes a huge domino effect. One car after another, pile up because they do not know how to deal with the situation.
Second, in the event of a wreck who is responsible? The owner of the vehicle or the manufacturer? While the vehicle does belong to the owner and he did know about potential problems, the manufacturer should be able to deliver a completely safe vehicle to a customer.
That brings me to another issue. No one can confrim 100% that an autonimous vehicle will not wreck. There wil alway be human error in the manufactoring process. Now you might say; but they will be assembled by robots, so there wont be any human error. Well: who assembled the robots, who programmed them? Humans did, thus introducing human error into the problem.
Another thing to be worried about is terrorism. Will these cars be able to be hacked? A terrorist could hack into an autonimous vehicle and use for whatever he desires. He could drive a bomb anywhere he wants. No place would be safe or out of rech of a terrorist.
As you can see there are many propposed problems with autonimous cars. Wrecks, responsibility, human error, and terrorism are just a few of them. The truth is that there will always be some sort of problem with autonimous cars. Glitches and human error willl make sure of that. The idea of a fully autonimous car is fascinating, but are they really the best for america?
| 4 |
6fcd793
|
The debate on the pros and cons of car usage has been an ongoing one. Slowly, the advantages are beginning to outweigh the disadvantages. Around the world, projects and programs have been started to test the effects of limited car use. Data has proved that limiting car usage will cause less pollution, less stress, and less traffic.
To begin with, gas released from our cars has slowly started to hurt us. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city."(source 2). This shows that the gas in our cars is one of the factors responsible for the growing pollution in our air. Reducing the usage of cars will not only benefit us, but also the world we live in.
In addition, almost everyone knows what it is like to be stuck in traffic. The stress inducing event must not be healthy either. By declining the use of cars, congestion will slowly diminish. Promoting other ways of transportation will improve health, mood, and traffic. "rush-hour restrictions have dramtically cut traffic;"(source 3).
Furthermore, a large portion of our population are constantly stressed. Car usage is accountable for a good amount of it. "When i had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," (source 1) says a citizen of a "car-free" community. By limiting car usage, healthier ways of transportation are encouraged. For example, hiking, biking, skating, and walking. All of these are extremely healthy compared to sitting in a car. Due to the fact that the United States is the country with the fattest people, these methods should be enforced. Healthy people then start to become happier. Therefore, reducing car usage will benefit our people's lives.
Hence, limiting car usage will create a better enviroment for people all around the world.
| 4 |
6fd2b7b
|
The Mona Lisa is a very iconic painting by Leonardo Da Vinci; however, no one pays attention to how her smile was constructed. According to the new computer software, Facial Action Coding System or FACS, she's 83 percent happy, nine percent disgusted, six percent fearful and two percent angry. This software is very useful and can help push technology ahead.
The process begins with a computer constructing a 3-D model of the face and all 44 major muscles must move like a human face. These movements are called action units. Dr. Paul Eckman, creator of FACS, classified the six basic emotions of facial expressions; happiness, sadness, surprise, anger, disgust, and fear, and implied them to facial muscles. The software can even track mixed emotions. For example, the Mona Lisa as she has four different emotions in her picture.
The Mona Lisa demonstration is intended to bring a smile to people's faces., while it shows just how much a computer can do. Dr. Huang predicts, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored". He continues to go on about how it could modify a lesson like a human instructor. This can be very useful for children and teenagers who are homeschooled and take online courses. The same technology can make computer-animated faced more expressive for video games or surgery.
This FACS machine isnt very necessary for daily life, but can help in the classroom. It is very cool and interesting, and can help teachers know when students are struggling. This software is going to help humans in the future and will only become more advanced. Dr. Huang notes, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication". He is correct with that statement.
In conclusion, Dr. Huang and his colleague did a terrific job in creating such an advanced piece of technology. This will help teachers and schools in the future. The only problem is the cost of the item, because it will most likely be pretty expensive. Making faces could reveal so much about the science of emotions.
| 3 |
6fd79d3
|
The author in "Driverless Cars Are Coming" presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I think that car manufacturers should be able to be on the streets more. Some examples are that they let out less CO2 and they use less gas to save you more money.
One example is that the driverless cars are safer than non driverless cars. Most of the people will agree that driveless cars are safer than people that are driving because they aren't focused on the road. They are more foucused on what is happing on their phones or watching what is happing around them instead o what is going on in frount of them. In the article it says that driverless cars have gone millions of miles without a single crash. While everyday people are crashing and killing other people because they care about what is going on their phone than what is going on the road. Sure they still will crash into other cars but with these cars but it will be less then what it is right now with people driving.
The second thing that makes driverless cars better is that they don't use that much gas and it'll help earth. Instead of paying like 50 dollars you will just have to pay 25 dollars to fill up your gas tank at the pump. You will start saving hundreds of dollars in just a year for chaniging to a driverless car and not only that it will also help on the place we live on. The cars we use now produces a lot of CO2 and that CO2 is hurting us but if we switch now we can change the world we live in by having less CO2 in the air.
Another way that driverless cars are better is that when you go on a long trip you get tired and feel like resting for a little bit. Well now you can, you'll be able to get on your phone and talk to someone or you could just lay back and see a movie that you have been meaning to see but just haven't had enough time to. You'll be able to do that and if something is going on around you the car's sensors will pick it up and tell you what you need to do. It would be a win-win thing case you get to do what you want to do and the car will take you where you need to go and it'll inform you if it needs you help to do something.
Those are some few exampels that shows us why we need to have driverless cars on the streets. So far it looks like the future is looking good for driverless cars for helping us be safe on the roads and saving us time and money. Its just a matter of time that we'll see everyone with driverless cars.
| 4 |
6fda4ad
|
The author talks about going to venus and explor it.in this essay in goning to be talking about his ideas and other ideas.he talks about the dangers of gonig the planets atmoshpere and other hard ships.
Venus is one of the closes planet to us at a certian time in its orbit. venus is also known as earths twin becuse both earth and venus are the same size.But venus can
also be called evening star becuse you can see it at night.
Some of the dangers of going to venus is its dangeruos atmosphere.like the planets density and its acidect rain we could send a robot or have a ship fly over and take picters but the clouds are to dense to do it. And we can not send a robot in there becuses of the clouds blocking the signals.
But NASA whants to explore so they are making a silicon carbon electronics. They have usesd what they know about the plant to test the product and it lasted three weeks under the conditions. the tech they whant to use mechanical computeres wich are computers that run on gears. The reson they are making it out of gears is becuse other elictonics can not withstand the heat and presser on the planet.
So after all the things scientist of gon throught to try to go to venus. Going there is still a long ways from us both in technology. And other develpments but the main
reson we want to go to venus is becuse we are cerious about what is there.
| 3 |
6fdced4
|
Venus Planet
The author is suggests that studying venus
is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. What the authior is trying to do, is make people belive about Venus planet, that is the most dangers planet in earth because how the differents speed and degrees.
First of all In paragrath 3 explains the different that degrees get and the
atmospheric presure.'' a thick
atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Even more challenging are clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atmosphere on the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees.Atmosoheric
presure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.''
Secondly What is trying tell that humans can go to that planet for the differents that is from our planet. And is telling us that scientists further visits to its surface. Scientists are trying to go and study that planet because how the author is telling us the planet is really interest, would be a good planet to go study and see how ebrything is for the scientists it might be a lot of work to do it won't be the easiest planet that they are trying to study. Is a really difficult planet to go study.
Thirdly the author is saying that 'NASA' is working on others aproaches to stuying venus. they are looking foward, trying to see how electronics made of silicon carbide, that way when they use the electronics aren't melting, for the high temputure, they have to make electrons really strong, and make sure everything will work with the high tempeture.
Lastly Venus is also call ''Evening Start' is the brihtest points of light in the night sky. this nickname is misleading since they say that venus is a planet because before they tought venus was not a planet when they knew that was a planet they decide to put a nickname. on my opinion they decide to put as 'Evening Star' is because the planet is so bright, that they tought it was just a star. Venus is the second planet from our sun so that means that our planet isn't that
far from the Venus. Even know that is close to our planet. It is so different everything from that planet is different fromout planet.
| 4 |
6fe17cd
|
They should change it to election by popular vote. Just because the electoral college is not divided evenly through out the states. So the president can win for having more states vote for him or her. The number of people in the state shouldn't count as how many votes they get.
Like it says in the artcle "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" paragraph 21 number 4 that "a large state gets more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign than a small state does. . . .". So its unfair to the smaller states just because of the size all the states should have equal numder of votes. People might say like in the artcle "The indefensible Electoral College:Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" in paragraph 13 that the "candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning." Thats why all the states should have the same number of votes so the candidates would go there to try to win them over.
Having popular vote help voters want to vote again. Like in the artcle "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President." "The electoral college method of selecting the president College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state."So thats why it should be changed to popular vote.
| 2 |
6fe2b9f
|
Unmasking the Face on Mars has always been an argumentive topic for us scientists and the conspiracy theorists. Is it just a naturally forming landform? Was it created by aliens? No one knows for sure but from our research, it is very unlikely that aliens could have assembled it.
Us scientists here at NASA take our jobs very seriously. We research the outside world for a living and theorists are just taking guesses! Would you rather believe a NASA scientist or a conspiracy theorist's hypothesis of space? As humans, we always choose the craziest scenarios and we assume the worst. It could be something as simple as a landform for all we know.
There is no proof of aliens but there is proof of landforms forming naturally. Yes, the "face" looks like it was made to look that way and yes it is oddly accurate to the face of an egyptian pharoh but this could just be a coincidence. We have very high tech cameras that shoot pictures of mars all the time. The "best" picture of the face from 1796 was taken by a camera with 43 meters per pixel. In 2001, we used a camera with 1.56 meters in each pixel so if there were so called "aliens" that assembled the face, they would have been captured in the shot as well. As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size.
What the picture shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. People sometimes say it reminds them most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. Another thing that makes the idea of it being a landform likely is that Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho is a lava dome that takes form of an isolated mesa which is about the same height as the Face on Mars so they are both very similar to eachother.
There are a lot of ideas about what the Face could be. We will continue research and further our studies. Until then, believe as you wish but remember, scientists or theorists?
| 4 |
6fe2f23
|
Can you imagine a place where you no longer have to drive and computers do it for you? As of now, that is not possible but who is to say that cannot be achieved. Driverless cars a thing for the future. Cars that no longer require a driver would be such a pivotal achievement for transportation. But, do we really need a computer to drive for us? Do we really want our safety to be held by computers? The answer is no. My position on driveless cars is that they are far-fetched and not practical. They aren't practical because they aren't truly driverless, they don't fit within current laws, and they really aren't safer. I wouldn't want me safety in the hands of a machine. Driverless cars are a cool concept, but really aren't practical.
Driverless cars are not practical because they aren't really driverless. You would still have to sit in the driver seat and pay attention to the road. You still need to be alert and be prepared to take over at any given point. So what's the point of driverless cars? As the article says, "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?", the answer is you wouldn't. If the technology of the car isn't ground-breaking and you still would have to drive, there is no reason to have a driverless car. Driverless cars still needing drivers is one reason that they are not practical.
Driverless cars aren't really fitting with the current driving laws. Most laws emphasizes the safety of drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. Laws are based on a human driver controlling the vechicle at all times. What would you do if a computer is in control of your car? With the current laws, a very serious questions arises. If you were to get into a wreck, who would be liable? The "driver" or the manufacturer of the car? As of the laws right now, driverless cars aren't really fit for a person to own one. There is too many questions of safety and the liability of the cars and cars around. That is why driverless cars don't fit in with the current laws and aren't really practical at this day and age.
People that are in support of the driverless cars claim that computer hardware and software make driving safer than having a real human driver. These technologies steer, accelerate, and brake themselves. Driverless cars are safer is not necessarily safer, as they still need real humans to take over in times of need. Also, as time progresses technology has a tendency to lag behind. This can cause major hardware and software malfunctions that can actually make these types of cars more dangerous. Driverless cars aren't really safer because they still need an alert driver and that fact that technology can fail.
Driverless cars are a thing for the future if they can be fully developed and made truly driverless. What is the point of driverless cars that still need drivers? What about the fact that these types of cars don't fit within current traffic laws? Are they really safer? The answers point away from driverless cars. They require drivers, they don't fit within laws, and they aren't actually safer. These reasons point to why driverless cars aren't practical and they are not a thing for the current day and age.
| 4 |
6fe4eb5
|
The limiting of cars in our community can help us significantly reduce pollution, save money, and improve health.
To begin with, the amount of pollution caused by cars has dramatically effected the enviroment. Acording to the text the capital of France in only five days of car smog. The amount of smog riveled to the smog capital of the world Beijing, China. That was only five days of car smog. If we keep this up, the first the sky will turn black and then it will fall and world will end! Hopefully nobody wants the world to end because of smog. To reduce the amount of smog and pollution caused by cars we can all reduce the usege of our cars. Therfore, the limiting of cars can significantly reduce pollution.
Next, limiting cars can help us all save money. To illustrate, we all like that "Cash Money". And all cars need gas to work, and the funny thing about gas is it cost money; alot of money actually. So if the limited useage of cars happen then, is we save that "Cash Money". As you can see the reduction and limiting of cars can save us that "Cash Money".
Lastly, the limit of car useage can and will improve health by making people walk. You see people every where are getting over weight. So by makeing them walk or use other modes of transportation we can lose weight and improve health. Thus, the limiting the useage of cars can and will increase health.
To conclude, the limiting of cars in our community can help us significantly reduce pollution, save money, and improve health.
| 3 |
6fe9ea7
|
The black smoke that leaks out of your car's tail-pipe is killing you.
With its toxic chemicals, and the stress that goes along with driving ,it's no wounder why our vehicular casutalty rate is so high. The answer seems to be clear,there are many advantages in reducing our car use. Not to mention the money saving opprotunities and traffic reduction that come along with letting go of our belovid crutch.
The world has long bin involved in a "love affair" with its cars and other forms of motor transportation, and now in 2015 we are by far, paying the price.
The dangers to your personal health and the health of the enviornment are cringe worthy. France, (being one of the most polluted ares in Europe.) at one point had 147 micrograms of particulate matter in there air. As a result Pairs put a partial driving ban to clear the air and the results where drastic. In just one week the smog cleared up just enough to lift the ban. Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up too 50 percent in some areas in the United states. Transportation is the secound largest source of America's emissions. This is cold hard proof that cars are a major contributer to our carbon foot print.
Many other countries have taken the lead in ridding the world of this enviornmental burdon. One of the most major exhamples being a cummunity in Vauban Germany. The inhabitants of this upscale community have simply given up there cars. The residents agree that the lack of cars have greatly reduced there stress. Similarly, in Bogota Colombia, they have created a set car-free day. This has encouraged other means of travel including biking, walking and skating. It's a fantastic way to lower stress and air pollutuon all at once. The word is now spreading through Colombia and 2 more cities have joined and muncipial authorities from other countries are very excited about the event. It sparked a mass improvement leading too new sidewalks, a reduction in traffic, and more upscale buisinesses.
More and more people are startting to catch on. The amiunt of licenses registeres each year are going down drastically and people "just dont see a need for a vehicle anymore." A study last year showed the decress in young people driving is at 23 percent between2001 and 2009. People organize there social life or jobs around where they can take public transportation or a bike. The main point in it all is that a car is just another way to get where your going and most dont really care how they get there in the first place.
Vehicle ownership is proving to be impractical, harmful, and expensive. With the rise of pedestrian accsess, bikeing, commercial and public transportation the over use of cars is becoming obselete. We need to improve our safety and lower our emissions to keep the planet and ourselves healthy. "The proof is in the pudding," life without cars is on the rise and it is welcomed with both arms open.
| 4 |
6fe9ea8
|
I Think is a great technology to now the students emotional expresions,and now their felings with that technology and can prevent allout of things. the process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like humans muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an action unit. Then Dr. Huang relies on the work of psychologist, such as Dr. Paul Eckman,creator of FACS [ Facial,Action Coding system]. Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happines,surprise, anger,disgust,fear,and sadness-and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. In my conclusion imagine a computer that knows when you' re happy or sad that is awesome in my opinion that is Great we can prevent bullyng in the future bring help for students and other people, we can now if the student or person is in difficult times in her life or is happy in my conclusion i think that this technology will help the people in the future, the New Software is A great job that is my conclusion Thanks you.
| 2 |
6fecbec
|
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too. Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. For years and years NASA has been trying to study Venus and despite their pursuits they have failed because of the risks that have occured. Venus should still be studied despite the dangers it presents because one day when Earth becomes overpopulated Venus could possibly be our only option due to how similar the planets are, our travels should go beyond Earth, and although it is dangerous it still needs to be studied.
Years from now Earth will become overpopulated and might be inhapitable; therefore, Venus could be our only option. In the article it says that, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on earth. The planet has a surface of rockky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetay visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." Venus should still be studied due to how similar it is to Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy condtions, but survivable for humans.
Our travels must go beyond Earth;although, it has been challenging to study Venus, there will always be risks that come along with studying new things; such as, the planets in our solar system. In the text it states, "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has no value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiousity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.
Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us. There has been numerous spacecraft sent to land on this cloud-draped world. Although each previous mission was unmanned and no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours does not mean that Venus should no longer be studied. Any planet will have their own dangers, causing there to be obsticles in our path of researching a potential, habitable planet.
Studying Venus will come will dangers and risks; but, our planet got this far because the people in it never gave up on pursuing a new study even if it had dangers of it's own. Venus should still be studied because our travels should go beyond earth regardless of the dangers, one day Earth won't be habitable and it's sister planet will be our only option, and new studies will come with their dangers they still need to be studied.
| 4 |
6ff53a2
|
This technology to read and find out the emotinal expressions of students is crazy and weird. Its spooky how looking at Mona Lisa picture can express yoiur emotions. Shes actually smiling, but if your mad she'll look mad. So creepy how that works. I feel like they should'nt of told us that. Now when we look and think so deep about this picture we can be frightened, in our dreams or whenever.
Its talking about shes 83% happy and the rest of percentages are mad, sad and all them emotional feelings. They said with this software they can caculate emotions. The picture in the software uses 44 major muscles, and the model must move like a human.
This is kinda smart to caculate emotions, and empressive with the picture where it really moves with 44 major muscles and tells you your emotions. Its true how we can tell how somebody feels by thier face expression, but not evreybody shows it. Some people must be going throught the roughest time in their life and still smile through it. So not everything can work. I like how the the software of Mona Lisa is really intended to bring a smile to your face, but sometimes it could creep you out.
| 2 |
7006ed1
|
Claim: This story is really about how many people studying about Mona Lisa and how the way her mood is.
Evidence: Lots of people try to figure out her history on her emotions. Someone uses a 3d computer and he figures out that she has 6 other emotions of herself.
Intro: Some people try to study her history from back in the day because of why she dosent smile that often and why is she always angry.
Body: Some people perform an impressive calculation on her feelings by the look of her face.
Conclusion: The whole story is about why people wonder why Mona Lisa never smiles that often. People uses lots of technology to try to figure out the way her mood was before she had 6 different emotions someone calls the person who knows lots of history about the story. Then they figure out that she did finaly smile during a painting class. By the look of her face the first time that someone notist lots of people were impressed it raised your eyebrows when you where surprised. Her smile really did change some back story about her first mood.
| 1 |
700baa8
|
Dear State Senator,
I am writing to you today to talk to you about keeping the Electoral College instead of changing to the popular vote. Their would be derastic changes if we switch.
First of all, the president and vice presidents election is held every four years which means that every four years the goverment needs to pay for all these polls for the Electoral College and the popular vote. Yes, I see that if we switch to the popular vote it would save money and you would not need to even include the electoral colledge anymore but, a counter of that is if a recount is called upon the our voting citizens then they need to go vote again and the govermeant needs to pay for all these polls. I am guessing that Electoral Colleges are alot cheaper to put together and easier. To keep the Electoral College would be cheaper in the long run.
Also getting all those American voting citizens to vote again,well thats another story. In many of the cases I have seen is that people want to do the least amount of work they have to do and making them go vote again that involves quite alot of work actually. Lines for polls can be out the door in some cases and most people are not that in to goverment in the first place. People are just flat out lazy Mr. Senator.
I also would not be very happy if the goverment had to do a recount on the popular vote. I for one dont want to have to go back up to the poll booths. That would be a insult to me if I had to do it all again because I have already broadcasted my opinion to the goverment once already. I for one dont want to have to do it again and I dont think anyone would want to. Hell,you may even start a rade or protesters,you never know intill you try. But be honest would you want to risk that. The Electoral College almost would never need to have a recount because of the small numbers considering how big Americas population plus, like I said before, it would be consideribly cheaper than the popular vote.
So their it is Mr. Senator do you want to start a state wide rade or have protestors at your door steps,do you want to have to get up and inconvinence your self because the goverment of America is now wanting a recount of the popular vote. I didnt think so. So now I hope you can make the right desicion here and stick with the Electoral College.
Thank you for the time you spent reading this and I hope it changed your mind or even strengthened your views.
Sincerily
Mr. Newport
| 2 |
7012c1c
|
The use of the Facial Action Coding System to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable, it'll allow teachers to better understand their students.
If teachers could identify when a student begins to lose interest in a lesson, then the teacher can think of a better way to teach them. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." The FACS also allows teachers to identify which students are going through depression. Leading those students getting faster help, and less suisides. The FACS is able to tell mixed emotions and identify each one in a percent value. "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry."
I believe this evidence is able to express my claim that, the use of FACS to read emotional epressions of students in a classroom is valuable. The technology gives teachers chances to avoid multiple, unwanted situations.
| 2 |
7015381
|
Dear State Senator,
The Electoral College is a significant way of selecting a new president or choosing for the president to have four more years as president. The Electoral College consist of 538 electors. Electing a president by Electoral College is not alwats good because of the possibilities of ways to make that president win. Such as, bribing, or false statements of change. The president should be a hardworking and well-deserving man who wants to make a change in the world. With that being said, the popular vote is the way we would like to keep as electing our president of the United States.
Additonally, the Electoral College is not generally smart in a way to elect the president of United States. Worded in source two The Indefensible Electoral College, "The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse". Electing Presidents is an important selection for the American people. Democrates and Republicans choose who the think deservers to be president and the popular vote process is the wise way to do it and the way we want to keep it.
Furthurmore, popular vote is going to bring in new, and great desicion making presidents in the near future. Stated in Source 3: In Defense of the Elctoral College, "A dispute over the outcome of an Elctoral College vote is possible-it happened in 2000- but it's less likey than dispute over the popular vote" proves the popular vote is less comotional with less chaos.
Justifiably, both ways of electing president is wise and great but, popular vote is the better way. Has less drama, chaos, and comotion. It also makes choosing a president 10 times easier. Popular vote is the way we would like to keep as electing out president of the United States.
| 3 |
7016205
|
Ever since cars were invented, they have widely been used as the primary source of transportation. They became so commonplace that their widespread use started to introduce negative impacts . As a result, some countries, or cities, have recently put in place programs or events to limit, or decrease, the amount of car usage in that area. There are many advantages to limiting car usage, including that not using cars is better for the environment and that it allows the city to improve itself.
In recent years, the environment has become a worldwide concern; one of the advantages to limiting car usage is that it will positively impact the environment. Today, people all over the world are paying attention to what they can do to help the environment, meaning that this is an advantage that will appeal to a widespread audience. One way that limiting car usage will help is that it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In Elisabeth Rosenthal's essay "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", she writes, "Passenger cars are responsible for 2 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe ... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States". By limiting the usage of cars, the amount of greenhouse gases being emitted into the world would decrease substantially. While the idea that everyone would stop using their cars and the gas emissions caused by them would disappear completely is unrealistic, the prospect that a majority of the emissions could do so is perfectly reasonable. The reduction of these emissions would mean that the air quality would increase and be overall healthier for both all the world's population and all the wildlife across the world. Robert Duffer provides another example of how less car usage would impact the environment in his essay, "Paris bans driving due to smog". According to the article, an intense smog had covered Paris for five days, when the city decided to ban car usage over the course of two days. The cause for the smog was thought to be the high use of diesel fuel in France, with 67 percent of cars using it over gasoline, about 14 percent higher than the rest of Western Europe. The plan for the ban had been that cars with even-numbered license plates to not be used the first day and for ones with odd-numbered license plates not to be used the next day. In actuality, cars with odd-numbered plates were never banned from driving since the smog had cleared just after the first day. This shows the impact of limiting car usage. In just one day, a smog that was comarable to the one in Beijing, China, one of the most polluted cities in the world, was removed considerably after just half the normal amount of cars were used over the course of a day. If this was used all over the world, the result would be even more significant. This evidence supports that limiting car use is good for the environment in more ways than one.
Additionally, the limited use of cars opens many opportunities for cities to improve themselves by adding new features or improving upon old ones. In the article "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky, the changes that the Columbian city of Bogota has gone through in response to less car use are discussed. The changes are a direct result of the city's Day Without Cars campaign, where car use is banned for the whole city for one day out of a year. It reads, "It has seen the construction of 118 mile of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city, according to Mockus, the city's mayor. Parks and sports centers have also bloomed throughout the city;uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up". These additions are in response to the city's inhabitants using alternative transport. Since cars could not be used, the public had to get to where they were heading by other means. Bogota was able to use the situation to improve itself by either fixing things already in place or adding new ones competely. Another way that a city improved itself as a result of limited car use is shown by Elisabeth Rosenthal in her essay "In German Suburn Life Goes On Without Cars". She writes, "While there have been efforts in the past two decades to make cities denser, and better for walking, planners are now taking the concept to the suburbs". One of the results of applying this idea to suburbs is that stores are placed within walking distance of houses rather than in a mall next to a highway. Vauban, the city where the changes took place, is taking advantage of the opportunities to open new stores. This change would not only create more business for the strore itself but improve the economy of the city by increasing spending. The overall impact that limiting car use has had on citites is that it provides opportunity for the city to improve itself.
There are many advantages to limiting car use. Not only does it improve the environment by removing smog and reducing greenhouse gas emission, but it also allows the area to improve itself by building new features. For this reason, limited car use should be seen as an overall positive idea.
| 5 |
701924d
|
The develpoement of driverless cars is unrealistic to me in many different ways. Due to the fact that just one car will need an incredible amount of technology to keep the car itself as safe as possible means that the car will be overly priced. Not only will It be over priced, but the fact that people are going through so much money to make a car that is able to be on "auto pilot" shows laziness.
A brand new, average car could cost to about 20,000 dollars. When they add on technology to ensure the saftey of the driver and everyone in the car, the prices of cars will become too expensive for most people, "For starters, they need a whole lot of sensors. Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mountes near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an interial motion sensor." People will begin to realize that it would only be avaliabe to wealthier people who can pay for an extremly expensive car that will only benifit them in one way. Them being able to have transportation of their own that they do not have to control means that they would more than likely not be paying attention to the road.
The idea of having a vehicle that you do not have to manage while on the roads sounds amazing to everyone. What happens when one or two of the sensors corrupt and the car steers off into the other lane? What if the motion sensor malfunctions while backing out of a driveway and a pedestrian is taking a jog and doesn't see the car backing out? There is no way that the driverless car could be 100% safe at all times. It dangerous to even think about how the car could have a mind of its own while on the highway,"If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--- the driver or the manufacturer?"
Transporting from place to place withought having to put your foot on the gas or making sure you remember to put on your turning signals sounds like a great and easy way to go places. Once the driverless car has been out for years and people begin to start using them often, the commubity will get lazy and irresponsible. No one will ever think they will have to drive themselves because they think that the cars will last forever and that they will just get better from the start, Theyre, wrong. The car could end having difficulties after a few years and they will shut down the production of the cars and people will be too lazy to drive themselces around. People will end up being dependent on the cars to do all of the "hard work" for them.
In essence, the develpomement of driverless cars is unreliable and should not be procceded with. The technology will raise the prices of the cars and make it impossible to purchase without a problem, it's too much of a risk for wrecks to happen due to failing sensors, and people will begin to rely on the car after awhile. Put an end to driverless cars and lets just stick with the ones we have now.
| 4 |
70207b5
|
Ever since humans have discovered space and the existence of other planets, the belief that we are not alone in the universe has been a back-and-forth question over the years. It has inspired many works and become a huge part of pop culture. While this can be fun to think about, sometimes people who can't accept the truth take it too far. The Face on Mars is just a natural landfrom because technology wasn't that good in 1976, people (especially conspiracy theorists) take can take things like this too far, and the formation is just like others on Mars and even on Earth.
The original photo of the Face on Mars was taken way back in 1976 by NASA's Viking 1. The spacecraft was only trying to find landing spots for another NASA ship, Viking 2, when the picture was snapped. Technology has evolved vastly over the past few decades, but 1976 was right at the start of this kind of space exploration technology, with the moon landing only happening 7 years prior to this event. When the latest photo of the face was snapped in 2001, its resolution was 10 times sharper than the Viking 1's photo. It showed every crack and bump on the surface of the "face", while the Viking's only showed patches of white while most of it was covered in shadow. Even a Mars Global surveyor photo from 1998 (which was taken with better technology than the Viking 1's) revealed a mesa formation. The photos taken after the original in 1976 definitely show anything but a face, which shows that the Face on Mars was only seen because of developing technology at the time.
Everytime there is a statement made by an organized group like NASA, or a government of any kind, people like to try to disprove these statements and say that they are fake. These people are called conspiracy theorists. They usually jump to conclusions on statements like this all the time with little or no evdidence. Back in the 1960s and '70s, the space race had started, causing many people to believe that we are not alone in this universe of ours. Anytime there was a trace of alien life out there, radios would broadcast about it, new channels would cover it, and sometimes even movies were made about these, just like in the case of the Face on Mars. Since these are people's main sources for news, they believed the claims instantly. When NASA revealed a picture of a supposed 'face on mars', the population went crazy. This was solid proof of ancient alien life on another planet, the conspiratists believed, but alas, the only reason this face appeared was due to technology with not enough resolution to snap a high quality picture of the formation. Conspiratists claimed that alien life on Mars would be something that NASA would "want to hide", but in response to this, defenders of the NASA budget said that "they wished there was an ancient civilization on Mars". If the face was actually alien, NASA never would have come out and told the public of its existence, or at least would've said that it was alien in its reveal. Instead that caption read; "A huge rock formation.. which resembles a human head..." This shows that NASA directly knew that the formation was natural and most definitely not alien.
The Face on Mars was quite the phenomenon, which started out the belief that there was alien life out in space and also on the planets near to Earth. When scientists first saw the formation from the Viking 1, they were suprised to see a face on the screen, but that was only at first. Scientists quickly realized that the face was nothing more than a Martian Mesa. These mesas are very common around Cydonia (the region of Mars in which the photo was taken). These formations are also on other parts of Mars and even here on Earth. Jim Garvin, a cheif scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program stated, "It reminds me most of the Middle Buttle in the Snake River of Idaho." This shows that a formation like a mesa is super easy to indentify, and one on Mars could just as easily be identified with good enough technology, as proven by the Mars Global Survey spacecraft and the Mars global surveyor from 1998, which was even taken through clouds on the red planet. It makes sense for the formation to be a mesa, especially since the fact that there were no other facelike structures like this found on Mars since.
The Face on Mars is a natural landform because the technolgy that took the photo wasn't that great compared to years after, conspiracy theorists can really blow things like this in the worng direction, and the formation of the face resembles structures like that on Mars and Earth. With our knowledge and exploration of space growing every day, it is just a matter of time until we discover alien life somewhere. The problem is, people can get so caught up in these kind of things and overexagerate them to beyond reasoning. Technology has advanced so much in the past few years, so much that we can see every crack and divit on the surface of a planet, so the question is, when will we actually discover a real "Face on Mars"?
| 6 |
7023d2d
|
The author talks about how Venus could have been similar to Earth many many years ago. The author says that Venus could have been exactly like Earth and how Venus could have been just like Earth when it came to supporting life. But later on in the article the author started to talk about how Venus' atmosphere is really dangerous and how its atmosphere is so dense that a person wouldn't be able to make it through there without burning up, and not that many forms of light would be able to get through the dense atmosphere either which meant no videos or pictures of Venus' ground and what it looks like. " 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 atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective"( The Challenge of Exploring Venus 6). This proves that Venus' atmosphere is so dangerous that even if you were able to make it to Venus you wouldn't be able to go inside of its atmosphere because it is so dangerous. This also proves that since there are dense clouds formed around the inside of Venus' atmosphere you can barely see through it which means that you wouldn't be able to get any pictures or videos, and if you did manage to get a clear look at Venus' ground you still wouldn't be able to take a picture because light can't get through the dense clouds in Venus' atmosphere.
| 1 |
7029c66
|
Venus is the second planet from out sun and Earth comes after Venus. The name Venus has another name and it is called the "Evening Star". However, the Evening Star is a misleading the reason for that it is because it is a planet. The reason why it's misleading is because its one of the brightest points of light in night sky. How are Earth and Venus alike to the other planets, what was Venus and how was it like, and why it is dangerous and why should we study it more.
First, Earth is known as the twin to Venus. The reason is because Venus is the closest planet to the sun and and its closer to planet Earth. Another reason why Earth is called its twin is because they both have the same density, size, and because its the closest in the distance too. After Earth comes Mars so it goes the Sun, Venus, Earth, and Mars. Those three planets orbit the sun at different speeds and what that means is that Earth is more closer to Mars than we are to Venus.
Long ago Venus was maybe covered tons of water such as our oceans and maybe supported animal life there. Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets. The clouds are the most challenging because of they are highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the atomsphere. The temperature on the planet surface is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The pressure of the planet is 90 times greater than what Earth experiences. The conditions on this planet is way more extreme than what the humans have.
The reason why its dangerous is because it the surface is way to hot because Venus is closest to the sun. The reason why its dangerous is because there is high pressure and heat that can cause erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquake, and on going lighting strikes. The reason why we should study it more is because Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Just imagine the thirty-plus miles above the surface like an airplane, the temperatures would be toasty at about 170 degrees Fahrenheit. The air pressure would be closer to the sea level on Earth. The solar power would be more than enough, including the radiation wouldn't exceed to Earth levels.
Venus is planet not a different type of star, and it is the second planet. The Earth and Venus are simliar to each other. Venus is a very hot planet because its closer to the sun and the conditions on that planet are too extreme. It's a dangerous planet because of the erupting volcanoes, very powerful earthquake, and also lighting strikes coming down to the surface constantly. This how Venus was like, how its simliar to earth, and how it's dangerous but they should keep on exploring it.
| 3 |
702a56c
|
Is it crazy that now there is a Facial Action Coding System that can identify human emotion in the world? Having a human emotion detected technology system is a bold positive choice in a classroom. A strong device that can read emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because, teachers can get feed back on their students about certain assignments, peers can understand one another easier, and overall a better environment as a school. One device easily has three reasons why it would be a great investment for students and teachers.
Reason one, The Facial Action Coding System is positive for a classroom because, teachers can get feed back about certain assignments based off students emotions that the system detects. In the text Dr. Huang predicts that "A classroom could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, (par 6)".
This been said, the evidence above is reactions you can get out of students and in the long run prevent. Not only does the system help the teachers by detecting these emotions, FACS will aslo benefit the students because the assignment or classroom function will most likely change due to the results.
Reason two, The Facial Action Coding System comes to benefit within peers themselves. The author states that " Dr. Paul Eckman, creator of FACS has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness (par 3)". Getting assignments changed because boredom is a good thing; but, would it be a plus that peers know what one another also think in the classroom too? Muscular action units can easily change the way students look at one another in the classroom.
Reason three, The Facial Action Coding System can cause an overall significantly better open environment of many classrooms and even the whole school.
Also, Dr. Huang has noted that "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication (par 6)". The notes above by Dr. Huang proove that not many people such as students to student or student to teacher share what they are thinking or feeling verbally. Would it be so bad for students and teachers to connect overall in the school and each and every classroom?
To gradually sum everything up, The Facial Action Coding System is an immensse benefit to students and teachers in the classroom. Technology that can read emotional expressions of students is valuable because, teachers can build feed back on their students about what is going on in the class, peers can understand one another easier through six basic emotions, and overall a better environment as a school can be promised. Mkaing faces and finding a device that can detect emotion can not only chnage things but open doors for science.
In conclusion, as the text states "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them (par 9)." This evidence above is the exact reason why FACS would be a outstanding investment for classrooms all over.
| 4 |
702ca03
|
Have you ever wondered about the planet Venus? Like, why don't we ever hear about that planet? Well this article called "The Challege of Exploring Venus" has all the answers for you, and explains why we should put more effort into exploring Venus despite the dangers we'd have to face doing so. The author of this article gives great description and acknowledges both sides of the argument in this persuasive article.
The author of the article gives great description and acknowledges both sides of the argument. In chapter 3 it reads, "Beyond Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." and in chapter 4 it reads, "If our sister planet is so inhospital, 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 system." As you can see this author does a splendid job of persuading us to get a more in-depth look at Venus and more effort into studying Venus.
The writer of this passage gives great description and shows you the other side of the argument too. The author gives us a reason as to why we should study the planet of Venus more such as, it has the most earth-like qualities than any other planet in our solar system (besides Earth of course). Did you learn anything new about Venus by this article? I know I learned alot from this. What would you do if you were in charge of NASA? Would you forget about Venus because of all the risks, or would you go more towards Venus and maybe not spend so much time focusing on Mars?
| 3 |
70348bd
|
I believe that there should be no more Electoral College because it doesn't give people much of a say in who becomes President because there is just a commitee of people that are voting for the President. "The Electoral College established by the founding fathers in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens" (Office of the Federal Register, Para. 1). The Electoral College only consists of qualified citizens it elect the President, so even when you vote the majority doesn't even matter because the President is only elected by those qualified citizens.
A lot of people prefer to have a different way of voting than we have now. "According to a Gallup poll in 2000, shortly after Al Gore won the popular vote but, still lost the presidency, over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind that we have now" (Bradford Plumer, Para. 9). This shows that more that half the country doesn't want the closed election, they want a direct election.
Some people still say that the Electoral College is a good thing because they think it is a fair way of voting for President, but even if their vote doesn't really matter they still think it is a good thing to have for our country. Also if they vote for a canidate who has the popular vote and still loses because the Electoral College voted for a different person, they might think that it is unfair, but they still think it is a good way of doing things.
All in all, we should do away with the Electoral College because it is an unproper way of voting for the President and also can be unfair. It is unfair because it doen't give people a say in who should become President. If the person running for office has the majority vote and still doesn't win, it shows that the people of this country don't really get a say in things that are important. Most Americans would like to do things as well.
| 3 |
703515b
|
I believe the Facial Action Coding System(FACS) is not needed in school classrooms. The FACS isn't beneficial to classrooms. Although the machine may inform the teacher if a student strugles or is confused, the FACS will serve as a destraction to students, and will end up burning a hole in the school corperations pocket.
The FACS is built to read faces for emotions. In the classroom it could read if a student strugles, is bored, or if a student is confused. The machine will notifiy the teacher which students need extra help. This eliminates the factor of students being to shy to ask for help. It is understandable that the FACS could potetionally help students in the classroom.
The average middle age student's attention spand is around 7 Minutes. With the FACS in the class room, athough designed to read students to see if students are confused or strugle, may serve as a distraction to students. Being a student myself, I would have a chance of getting distracted. Students don't need a machine to distract themselfs from their lesson. The FACS would just become another block in furthering a students education.
The FACS sounds like a expensive machine to have in a classroom. There are always chances that students may damage or even break the machine unintentionally. Having the FACS machine in classrooms, teachers will have to know how to operate and use correctly. Teachers possibly will have to take course to learn how to use the FACS. Which all cost money that the school board may or may not have.
In conclusion the idea of having a FACS in the classroom isn't a bright thought. The FACS will distract students,and possibly be a waste of money and time. The only upside is the FACS will read students when the teacher can't, and be able to identify which students need help.
| 4 |
7035b02
|
Dear state senator,
With so many opinions on the electoral college, theres reasons in which to keep it or abolish it.
I would like a favor in keeping The Electoral College because its an election of the president by vote in congress and election of the president by a popular vote of qualified citizens."The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by congress(Source 1,2). Without The Electoral College everything will fail due to the fact that the college does all the voting and picking and decideing if not the Electoral College then who else will do it; All the other congessmen has to do there own job in which they cant do what The Electoral College does. The Electoral College has been in plce for a while The founding fathers created it. Its consists of 538 electors. There are disadvantages to like voters dont vote for the president, but for a slate electors, who votes for the president. At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. But then theres advantages " The Electoral College is widely regareded as an anachronish, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense. it is the electors who elect the president, not the people(source 3). When you vote for a presidental candidate youre actually voting for a slate of electors. People have thier own opinions but i think it would be better to keep the the traditional going on keeping the electoral college.
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME
| 2 |
7035dc2
|
If you are considring becoming a sea going cowboy you should, and I have a few reasons why. My frirst reason is you get paid to travel and it makes a great learning oppertunity for adults to learn abot new cultures and races you will be able to do new hobbys, learn new resipes. Also you get to travel the world get to travel to the most beautiful places on earth including Greece, Italy, France and many more places. If you love animals you will be able to take care of them but the only down side of that is you have to clean there stalls
You may now be wondring If Im going to be taking care of animals twentey-four seven you would not have time to hae fun but dont worry you will have plenty of fun especially on the return trips you will enjoy baseballl, ,vollyball ,table-tennis fencing ,boxing ,reading ,and whittling. You will also once gotten to the destination have fun there and swim go ,boat rides, and see marvouls things.
In conlusion you see it is obvious that you should become a sea going cowboy. You will learn new things and vist many beautiful places and meet many interesting people from diffrent cultures and races.
| 3 |
7036074
|
The article titled "Making Mona Lisa Smile," describes a new technology known as the Facial Action Coding System (or FACS). This system is able to recognize human emotions. This new technology was developed by proffessor Nicu Sebe, proffessor Thomas Huang and Dr. Paul Eckman. Together, they created this revolutionary software and hope to see it's advancement, not only in the field of science, but in every day life. One of these examples include the classroom, where the ability to read student's emotions would be valuable.
In order to detect human fellings, the system first, builds a digital 3-D model of the human face. This model includes the 44 major muscles used by human's to convey emotion. Each expression is compared to a neutral model so that the computer can detect differences and the movement of certain muscles. The article reads, "Movement of one or more muscles is called an 'action unit.'" (paragraph 3) Then, these action units are matched with the action units of the six basic emotions programmed into the system: happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. FACS is then able to detect a face's emotion. Paragraph 4 states, "By weighting the different [action] units, the software can even identify mixed emotions..." (paragraph 4) The intensive proccess by which FACS works, allows a computer to associate human emotion at an extremely deep level.
The FACS software has many implications in everyday life. Paragraph 6 of the article elaborates on a few of these uses saying, "...if you smile when a Web ad appears on your [computer] screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different... The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive- for video games or video surgery." (paragraph 6) One of the more important uses of the program is at school. While students are at a computer, FACS could detect if the student was becoming bored or confused and could then change or modify the lesson to make it more engaging, therefore providing a positive learning experience for all students. The article says, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication..." (paragraph 6) While human's may have a harder time detecting these deeper degrees of expression, a computer would have no problem. Having a technology that can detect this would help improve the world, especially in the classroom setting.
The technology known as the Facial Action Coding System, described in the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", is revolutiuonary.
By comparing the movement of muscels on the human face, the system is able to detect a specific emotion. This system in turn, would have a major impact on everyday life and have major value in a classroom. Hopefully, with the FACS software and other developing new technology, people's learning experiences will be greatly improved upon so that students are provided with an approach to learning that works best for them.
| 4 |
7036f2d
|
There are many challenges that come with the exploration of different planets. The one that is most facinating is the planet Venus. There could be many difiiculties to studying this planet. Scientist do not care because from ther studies this is the most earthlike planet in our solar system. Nasa wants to send people up there to Venus and get more information about what they are working with. Studying Venus would be a very dangerous and hard task to complete, although it is the most earthlike planet in the solar system, and it may be possible to send humans to the planet without injuring them.
There are many red flags about this planet Venus. As the passage says ¨ Numerous factors contribute to Venus? reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study...¨. This planets temperature is around 800 degrees Fahrenheit or more wich is way to hot for any human to surviive through. Venus is known to have the hottest surface temperature than any other planet. The preause was calculated to be 90 times greater than it is on earth. That type of preasure is enough to crush any one of us. Even though Venus is dangerous scientist see this planet to be the most simmilar to earth.
Venus is also called Earth? ¨twin¨, it is called that for many reasons. Like Earth Venus has a simmilar distance and size, it is also the closest planet as well. Venus has a rocky surface and looks as it has simmilar features to Earth. Things such as valleys, mountains, and even craters. It looks as if Venus could have even been covered in large ocenas which could support life form. Seeing these things NASA strives to send people up to the planet to investigate closer.
Although the conditions on Venus were really bad scientist believe that they could survive them using various technology. The solution to there problem would be to make a vechile that would hover over the surface. The astronaunts would float over the gasses and heat not touching a thing. They would have to be about 30 miles above the land to be at a safe distance. The temperature would still be pretty hot but it would be surviveable. Even if they are that high it would not be close enogh to gather samples and data from the planet.
Venus was and still is a certain thing that is hard to study, but scientist continue to try due to the fact that it is the most earthlike planet, and could be possible to send humans there. The author collected great data and research of this planet Venus finding out these following things. Venus is challenging to study and is dangerous. It is known to be the Earth? ¨twin¨ due to the fact that they have the most similarities. NASA has plans to send people up there to explore the planet one day. Venus does present many dangers that could be life threatining, but it would be nice to have more information about one of the planets that could once have life form for people to survive on.
| 4 |
703ac27
|
Limiting car ussage lowers the polution rates. A quote from lisabeth Rosenthal's passge "
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars
", "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Many people can go without personal cars and making smarter ways for transportation such as a bike, a bus, or carpooling with a friend to get to their destonation. A statment from the passage "
Paris Bans Driving Due To Smog ." "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifting smog..." Meaning less cars make the road safer by limiting the number of cars allowed to drive on that certain day.
Places are banning cars on the roads on certain days to limit the number of drivers and limiting the amout of polution. From the passage "
In German Suburbs, Life Goes On Without Cars ." it states "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."" By telling drivers they can only drive on certain days helps the environment and cutes back on smog and accidents.
The United States is also joining in on the "smart planning" movement by cutting back on the number of drivings on the road and number of cars owned by people. More people are taking the bus now rather than wasting and polution their gasoline. More people everywhere are taking bikes, walking, and carpooling with a friend to save money and gas. We now have electric cars where we can charge our cars in an outlet rather than filling up the tank with gasoilne.
It is better for you to walk or ride a bike to your destionation its smarter too. If you ride your bike, walk, take the bus, or carpool with a friend you are impaction greatly on the environment by reducing accidents and limiting smog. You can also save money on not taking your car everyday to work or school, taking the bus or carpooling can do alot.
| 1 |
704009b
|
hello, state senator, i argue in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the united states. there aree many things wrong with it. voters dont actually vote for a slate of electors, who elect whos the president. the elctors could be anyone not holding office. voters cant always vote for their electors either.
the single best arguement againt the electoral college is the disaster factor. faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their parties canidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please.
perhaps maybe there was a tie in the electorial vote. this is considered the most worring of all. the election would be thrown to the house of represenatives, where state delegations vote on the president.
at the most basic level, this is unfair to voters.. because of the winner takes all system in each state, canidates dont spend time in states they know they have no no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the swing states.
as to end this argument, i have to say the electorial college is unfair, outdated, and irrational.
| 3 |
7044865
|
Everyday when you wake up and get ready for work there's always one thing you use, it's inched it's way into your daily life and now you wouldn't be able to do most things without it. It's your four wheeled friend that sits out in your driveway or garage, your car. Every day millions of people drive miles and miles in a car, using them to go to work or to go and see other people, but what people don't understand is the need to limit just how much they use their automobile companions.
Cars have changed our lives for the better and for the worse. They save us a tremendous amount of time by making traveling super efficient, but along with that is air pollution. Cars emit greenhouse gasses, and these gasses trap heat which in then leads to warming of the surface of the earth. This warming of the earth creates drastic changes in many environments such as the polar regions. "Passenger cars are responsible for twelve percent of greenhouse gas emmisions in europe... and up to fifty percent in some car intensive areas" This was stated in an article about German suburb life witout cars. By limiting the amount of which we drive and by switching to alternative sources for transportation we can lower the amount of greenhouse gases and stop the heating of the earth.
Furthermore, these gases create smog. Smog is similar to fog but instead it has gases emitted from cars in it. Smog is usually thick and can be hazardous to environments. It was so bad in Paris that they set a partial driving ban in which people couldn't not drive becuase they didn't want the smog to get worse. The problem here is that people still continued to drive out even though there was a ban being inforce. So, this is another issue in which cutting back on car uses can fix. If we switch to biking to places that are withing biking distance or walking to place that are walking distance than we wouldn't have to worry about smog, or bans.
Automobiles have changed the way we live our lives and the way we do things, but they also have changed our communities. The typical city today consists of tall buildings and a surplus of streets and avenues, but parks are not as common. In Bogota there has been celebrating a day without cars for three years, and it has seen changes in the community. By having everyon give up their car for a day it can change their view on things, can make them notice things about the place in which they live in that they did't know about before. It can show them the beauty of their surroundings and this can lead to people wanting to protect that beauty and improve their city. This can be done in the form of building parks, and fixing uneven sidewalks.
So all in all, we depend on cars for daily purposes and it may seem hard to let go of your keys and walk, but if we all do that every once in a while it can lead to tremendous benefits. Imagine if you could walk outside and see people walking and enjoying themselves, not having to worry about gas prices or traffic jams. Imagine if we didn't have to worry about greenhouse gases or smog. Going for walk instead of driving may not seem like much, but it has major impacts on a multitude of things.
| 5 |
704a88b
|
Students would not be happy that a machine reads your face to tell a teacher how your feeling. Sometimes people want to be left alone because they are sad or mad. So having this machine woud not be good to have because some teacher could be nosy and ask why are you mad or sad. The machine cold also tell if your lying.
Sometimes you got to lie, so you could be left alone. Students would probably skip school because of this machine. Lots of schools will be empty because students do not want teachers to know about them. This machine could be used in pictures or face portates to see how the person in the picture is feeling, but to use it on students then no.
The police could use this machine to find out if criminals are lying about what they did. Parents would also be mad that teachers are using the machine on their children. There is no point of teachers using this machine. They do not need to know how your feeling at all. The teacher only us it for a reason or when nessasary not when they just feel like it.
| 2 |
704bebe
|
The Electoral College has its pros and cons. Either keeping the Electoral College or changing it to election by popular vote for the presidents of the U.S. will have its disadvantages and advantages of course. So, why keep it if the people don't actually pick the president?
One of the reasons why the Electoral College should be changed is because its not Democratic. The voters don't vote for the president, they actually vote for a slate of electors who are the ones who elect the president. "Because of the winner-take all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the 'swing' states" - by Bradford Plumer. Its not fair that some states won't even have a saying in choosing the president. Everyone should have a saying even if the candidates in the winner-take all system don't want to spend their time. We live in a democratic country we should be allowed to choose the persident instead of the Electoral College. Its unfair and irrational that the electors choose the president instead of the people.
The Electoral College does help the elections avoid Run-Off Elections. Larger states will always get more attention in a campaign than a small state. This is because larger states have a bigger population than small states."The most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election". -by Richard A. Posner. Just because not everyone pays close attention to the competing campaign. It doesn't been they shouldn't be treated differently than the ones who do. Everyone should be treated equally no matter what there opinion or choice is.
My opinion about if we should keep or change the Electoral College is biased. I don't think we should keep or even change it for the president to be elected by a populr vote. The electoral college helps weight the political balance in large states. It also doesn't allow the people to vote for the president. Either way i would be fine with whatever decision happens to the electoral college. I can't chose a way to argue about it cause i go both ways with my arguements.
In overal the Electoral College has its advantages and disadvantages. It all depends in everyones point of view. People should be treated equally about the decision they made. Let the people be able to choose the president of the United States its a right they have don't take it away from them because it wouldn't be fair to them. We live in a democratic country and the people have the power.
| 3 |
704ca8c
|
In this essay im going to prove to you why that electorial colleges should be gotten rid of. i think that elections should be won by popular vote.
With Electorial Colleges what the public wants or voted for really just doesnt matter because if the majority of the Electorial College disagrees well then the majority vote is irrelevant to the election and the canidate that the Electorial College voted on will will the election. " The Electorial college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." I comepletely agree with that statement. the Electorial colleges are not dermocratic at all and when you vote for a presidential canidate well you're actually voting for a slate of electors. the Electorial College is also an unfair way to determine our president because well each state has a different number of Electorial College votes. Each state should have an equal amount of Electors to make it at least somewhat fair; its still unfair because of the fact that they can always out vote the popular vote from the citizens. when the Electorial College decides to out vote the actual winner that becomes problematic to the citizens because now a canidate that the majority of America didnt want to become president is now president and that can be problematic because the people may become angry or upset in some way because a canidate they felt didnt stand for a good cause or that was unfit to run the country is now in charge. also like what is the point of letting the people vote for who they want to become president if their vote may not even matter or make a difference because the Electorial College is going to do what they want anyways.
| 3 |
704db62
|
Driverless Cars Are Coming
Can you imagine cars driving for you? It sounds kind of strange but, Google is trying to create a car that drive for us, and i hate the fact that they are coming up with this idea. It would be kind of werid for them to switch up a driving method that we used for so may years.
When i heard the news about driverless cars I dropped my newspaper. The fact a car will be really driving for you, stopping and going sounds crazy enough but also, when google said " They can steer, accelerate , and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." When the driverless car gets in a work zone and or a accident the Google car deritly hops in human mode, which is not safe. What if the human is not paying attention and the google car crash into something, the human would be in falut not the car. Google says that they will have manufacturers that will alert the driver like, flashing lights on the windshield to annouce when a driver should be prepared, but what if the driver is not paying attention to the windshield the driverless car would still jump to human mode. Which is way to unsafe for the lifes of the driver and the people on the rode of the driverrless car.
I disagree with Google and the driverless car because the Googloe car will basically change the unvirse. As stated in the article "Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident." Which means that when someone goes to take their driverrs test they will need to know how to basically have to have good eye sight and have to be really focesd on one thing wich is the car.
| 3 |
70509cc
|
Dear Senator,
The electoral college is in fact not best form of electing the president of the United States of America. When using the electoral college for voting for president, voters are not really voting for the president. Instead, they are voting for a slate of electors who then elect the president. Voters can't always control who their electors vote for, so it is all in the hands of the chosen electors. The electors must be trusted to pick the choice that their people want, but we all know that not everyone is as trustworthy as we would like to believe. The electors could possibly vote for the party that was not wanted in the first place, which is a problem. This brings about many possible issues for the people of our country.
Having to vote for someone who then is being trusted to vote for who you would have rather voted for yourself is a huge issue. Not only could they vote for the wrong person instead of the one that you wanted, they could potentially bring the country great danger if they vote for someone who could bring about bad things to our beloved nation. The electors could always defy the will of the people.
We could save the time wasted having to vote for someone else who has the potential to vote against who we wanted to vote for by just having a direct vote for who we wanted to vote for. Having a direct vote would give the exact opinions straight from the people of the country, and there would be less arguing and hatred for who becomes the president. The whole country would be able to voice their own opinions instead of who they believe has the same opinion as them.
Having a popular vote instead of the electoral college process is a time saver, and helps the people of the country. It allows the people to vote for who they actually want directly, instead of voting for someone to then vote for the president that they want. It would give people a greater influence to vote, knowing that their own vote actually directly affects the outcome of the presidential election. It would potentially eliminate all of the electors, saving time, money, and a vote for the next president of the United States of America.
| 3 |
70542b0
|
So do you think this technolgy to read emotional expressions is right? To start with like maybe reading animals probaly not reading us humans like we really dont need a meachine to read us we can read ourselfs. You can just see how your feeling that day and if your feeling good thtas good. I absoulty dis agree with this artical. How much money would we have to pay for these things anyway like there gonna be pretty expansive.
Also in the text us humans can read our firends once we get to know them we will know if there having a bad day. Eckman has classfied six basic emotions happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,sadness. Just stateing this im pretty shure i would know if i was all of them emotions maybe a meachine to read my future i would want to see. Also back to my point why buy this when there are much nearer things to buy. Maybe people that are depressed is gonna say thats not true im happy and all this.
| 2 |
7056339
|
More people today are driving less and using public transportation, walking, or riding a bike more. The main reason for this is because it benifits our environment. When people drive a car it releases gases into the air and breaks down our ozone layer that protects us from harmful rays from the sun. Limiting car use helps by decreaseing the gases into the air. People all over the world are helping prevent the usage of cars in many ways.
In Germany, people are moving to places that are "car-free" which is stated in the article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars . It also says that "cars ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park-Large garages...Where a car-owner buys a space, for 40,000, along with a home" (article 1 paragraph 2) This is trying to limit the usage of cars buy making it cost so much to park your car. Some people are saying that cars make them tense and by walking it makes them happier and more relaxed. They dont have to stress about putting gas in the car or driving safely. They are also trying to "make cities denser, and better for walking"(article 1 paragraph 6) Puting stores closer to areas with a higher population so people can walk to them helps. This is an advantage to people who live in car-free areas.
Paris is also taking part to help better our environment. They have "enfoced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" according to the article
Paris Bans Driving Due to Smog . The city is being more forceful with this action by giving a fine of 22-euros ($31) to people who didnt leave their cars home on their day. Due to having these days banned from driving "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France" (article 2 paragraph 14) By doing these two day France was no longer considered the most poluted city in the world, Beiging, China was the new holder of this name. People are now hopeing to get "plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers" This will help bennifit the environment by decreasing the air pollution in the air.
BOGOTA, Colombia is making their move by having a car-free day where Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work. " The goal is to promate altrenative transportation and reduce smog" according to the article
Car- free Day is Spinning into a Big Hit in Bogota . They want to show people there are several other ways to get somewhere without useing a car. A couple using a two-seat bicycle said it was a great way to take away stress and lower air pollution. Other cities in Colombia are also taking part in this event. Now the city of Bogota is making 118 miles of bike pathways for people to use daily. This day helps more people get outside and get active to. The article also states that " Parks and sport centers also have bloomed throughout the city" Having this day reduces the air pollution that was occuring and helps people relax.
To conclude, many citys are taking part in this act. They limited the car use and helped limit air pollution. People are starting to use cars less and take more alternative routes like walking or biking. Maybe you should try walking or riding a bike to work or school. You may like that more then driving and it helps the environment!
| 4 |
7057eb6
|
You shoud joi the sea going cow boys because it is an adventure.It is fun.You get to help people gather suplys shelter
and you get to help aor country get a better veiw on what we with do forv them and that we will not let them down and that we care about that country and that is a good thing and that if they think that we may have some countrys. helping us when a war destoys our coutry.It is always a good thing to help other country like our country that is also a good thing to
do
for them that is that is why you should join them because we are a helpful country we have the fredom of speech the fredom to tell the truth and thev fredom to tell the truth the fredom to do what we want to do and say what we want to say.We have a free country this is one of the best countrys to be at but we are the poorest country in the wourld because of the goverment and we could get it up if we start to make the cost on everthing more but cofee and candy and toys but that is a nother topic and if i could i would talk about it .
| 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.