Datasets:

prl90777

/

essay_100_3

like 0

f2aaa45

"The face on mars" was not created by aliens/life on mars. Alot of people are questioning if the "face on mars" is actually a face made by life/aliens on the planet. It also looks like a few common landforms such as a butte or mesa. It may resemble a face but you can not say it looks like the first thing you see you have to study it more and closer so you can say for sure what it is. It could be anything, so why say its a face. The passage says "It also looks like the middle butte in the Snake River Plain in Idaho". The passage also states that it could be the lava dome that takes form of an isolated mesa. Yes the shawdows make it seem like it has two eyes, a mouth, and a nose but those are just shawdows, they can't determine what it is and what it is not. The first time they saw the picture it looked clearly like a face to them, But once they got a closer look and zoomed in a bit more on their camaras they could see that it not only resembles a face but something much more than that, it has qualities that make it look as if it were a landform and not a face at all. The clearer and closer the camera got the less it looked like a face at all. from far away it looks clearly like a face so many people thought thats what it was but shortyly after that they when back up to mars and got a clearer picture of what it really is, it is much more clear than it was before and you can tell it doesn't look quit like a face but like a natural landform. This is why the "face on mars" is in fact just a natural landform and not a face created by aliens/life on mars.

12

1a8f50e

The author of "The challenage of exploring Venus ," suggests that studying Venus is worthy despite the dangers that are presented. Venus is sometimes called the "Evening star," it's one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. Venus is the second closest planet to the sun, but still a safe distant. It's also not to far away from us, earth.Venus is often referred to as Earth's "twin." It's the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and also occasionally closest distant to Earth. Even though Venus hasn't had a spacecraft land in more than three decaddes it's still worth studying. Humans have sent sapacecrafts to land numerous of times, on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, for a good reason. No spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Due to this Venus has a reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study. There's many reasons to why you couldn't survive on planet Venus. Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide, which is very challenging for us. The clouds are even more dangerous because of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. Temperatures average in venus is like 10 times higer than what we are used to. Over 800 dregrees fahrenheit, and also atmosphereic pressure is 90 times greater than what wea re used to on our planet. Venus has the highest tempetures in pur solar system. If were ever to land a spacecraft to Venus, the spacecrat would probably melt. Astronomers are fascinated by venus because longlong ago Venus was the most Earth- like planet. Venus was covered largely with oceans and could have supported in various forms of life. Venus still has some features that are alike Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and has similar features such as valleys, mountains, and caters. NASA is thinking about sending humans to study Venus. If humans were to go to Venus they would have to float above the fray. In a blimp like vechile hovering 30 miles above the roiling venusian landscape. Tempetures would still be very toasty at 170 degrees fahrenheit, but tempeture would plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. It probably won't be posible to traval to planet Venus.

12

f8d6719

Being able to detect other peoples and even your own feelings when you want to just by looking into a computer to detect whether you are happy,sad or angry is unique. But if you are not willing to share or show that information at a public place it would not be. Especially when your surrounded by your own classmates and one of classmates accidentally sees what the technology detects on you or someone else. I personally think the use of this technology to determine what your mood is pointless in a classroom full of students. I mean what would be valuable about it? Besides detecting your mood. Students come to class just to learn, be creative and open their mind to knowledge. The Facial Action Coding System would be more of a distraction to kids they would not be worried about the right things. Also some students would not take it seriously they would just play around when it comes to this just by making faces into the computer. And inviting their friends to come along and do it with them. Which would be a huge distraction to to both the students themselves and the students that are actually trying to learn. When it comes to stuff like this students would just use it as a toy and will not actually use it for what it is for or see the bigger picture for it. The authority would be very angry once students are playing with it and not paying attention. The Facial Acting Coding System could possibly start some problems with students and their classmates. For example say their is a student sitting down in front of the technology and it detects the student is angry and sad. What if they are other classmates watching what it detects and ask the student "Whats wrong why are angry?". The other student would not want to tell him because it is probably something personal they would like to keep to themselves and not share with others. This will cause the other classmate to go around and tell everyone that the student was angry and sad. It might possibly cause chaos. Therefore these examples show perfect evidence on why this technology should not be available in a classroom. It can cause a lot of problems, playing around and just an unecessary distraction to not one but many. And possibly it may not even be accurate in some cases.

34

96c98de

Car use. Everyone has a car, most everyone for that matter. Even tho they are wonderfull, look cool, and sound cool. They arnet the best thing for this earth. For instence, cars give off egsost that harms the earths atmosphear and helps global warming grow, witch is not good. They also kill millions per year with no intention of harming anyone. Last and formost the cost way to much money and drive people into the ground. (no pun intended) Let me explain. If almost everyone on this earth has a car, some have 2 or more or some dont have any, and if there is 7 billion people on this earth. Do the math, thats around 14 billion cars driving around, and eatch one of those cars give off exsost that hurts the enviroment. The earth has a layer ever it called the ozone layer and protects the harmfull sunrays from hurting life on earth. But with cars driving around that hurts the ozone layer. Also, cars kill many people per year. Car acsiddebts are a random event that happens when soneone night be on there phone. Or talking on their phoe. Maybe even just not payibg atetion. Another big problem is drunk driving. Someone will be out partying or haveing some drinks at a bar, and gets drunk and unable to drive. But still dose it anyway. That causes alot of crashes to and kills many people. Last and formost. Making people go poor and loos their money. When you buy a car you can get insurance, but if you dont, and crash into someone elses car, you will have to play for their insurence untill the car if fixed. This proses can litterly make poeple loose their homes. Thats whay if you do get a car. You need insuarnence. In conclution. The world would be  very well with out cars. Less deaths. Less poeple loosoing money. And hurting the enviremment. Now i cant see a world without cars. But i can definently live with one.

12

e67b702

Ever heard of using technology to read students' emotional expressions in a classroom? Of course not, because it is not necessary. What good would come out of scanning a student's face? The article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" does not give many reasons on how this technology would benefit people. This technology is also a little confusing with giving information. The use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is unvaluable because it serves no real purpose, would cause confusing emotional problems, and we shouldn't have to rely on it. By human nature, we can already tell or sense how someone around us is feeling. Why would we need the technology of reading someone's face when we can do that by looking at a person? Maybe not always, but for the most part we can tell when someone is feeling down or happy. In paragraph 5 of this article it states, "...we humans perform this same impressive "calculaion" every day... you can probably tell how a friends is feeling simply by the look on her face." This supports how this technology is not exactly needed. "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." Which is it? Is she happy or angry? Why is she disgusted and fearful when she's mainly happy? This technology would describe several different emotions that one is feeling. Because of this, it would be confusing to really understand someone. In paragraph 4 it states, "Dr. Huang, 'even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression' (like not smiling as broadly)." This supports how people do show various emotions, so it would be confusing, whereas without the technology, people can question each other and converse. Why rely on this technology instead of actually communicating? We are people, and in a classroom, bonds can easily be made. Therefor, we can talk to each other in order to discuss emotions. Paragraph 6 states, "Imagine a computer that knows when you're happy or sad." Even though having this technology where "it could modify the lesson," would be helpful, it's not something we can't do ourselves by talking. Paragraph 6 also states, "...it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This shows the technology would be beneficial in a way, but it's not valuable nor necessary. This technology to read the emotonal expressions of students in a classroom is not valuavble due to not having a good enough purpose for use, it's confusing; almost unreliable, and we can communicate without it. In a classroom, we should be able to express our emotions without the technology. We can verbally discuss topics and share. This technology would not be as valuable as a good teacher, tutor, or instructor.

34

20f1b82

"Driverless Cars" sound like something from a movie, not real life. These are one of the most outrageous and ridiculous ideas I have ever heard of. These cars should not be allowed in the future because they are unsafe, expensive and will cause conflicts betweeen owners and manufacturers. If these "Driverless Cars" become a common thing in our daily lives, things will be different and people will be in danger. Driverless cars would be very unsafe. If the system malfunctions or goes bad the car could do whatever it wants. There is always a chance that the car will not take you to the right place or the breaks decide they do not want to work or some reason. It says in the article that "For starters, they need a whole lot of sensors." What would happen if a sensor broke or the sensor was covered up by something. Inevitable crashes would be the answer. The article also talks about how to alert the drivers when they need to take over when it says, "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object. The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." This could go wrong if the driver falls asleep or the seats lose the ability to vibrate. The driver could also be startled by the surprising vibration that it may cause him to swerve or crash. The announcement could go wrong if the driver is hard of hearing or if they lower the volume because they feel it is irritating. Overall "Driverless Cars" are unsafe. "Driverless Cars" would be very expensive not only to manufacture, but to purchase aswell. The majority of people are middle class and a car with such high-end features and accomodations would most likely be out of the price range for middle classed people. The article says, "Radar was a device on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars." This shows that radar alone used to be very expensive. It is already expensive just to buy a regular car but all of the sensors and radar and other features added would only up the price. This is not including all of the gas prices, maintainence, and other features that people want and have to pay for. Expecting these "Driverless Cars" to be the new everyday thing is just not in the budget of everyday people. The conflict of who to blame when an accident happens is very simple. People would not want to pay for the accident so they would say that their car malfunctioned and end up filing for a lawsuit against the manufacturer. This whole entire idea of these new cars would cause an ongoing series of problems and lawsuits that would would fill up and awaste the courts time. "Driverless Cars" are a problem waiting to happen. In conclusion, I do not believe "Driverless Cars should be allowed to drive on public roads. They are unsafe, expensive and will cause conflicts betweeen owners and manufacturers. The realistic idea of these cars working, and being reliable and safe, is very slim. People are fasinated by the idea of these cars, but they do not see the big picture which is all the threats and dangers this car holds.

34

db1689b

Driverless cars will be a bad idea in many ways. They could maunfuciton and create a crash or maybe even death. The car can also watch you, People prefer to have some privacy instead of being monitored 24hrs a day. You have too be on alert everytime you get in the driverless cars. Its like driving people buy it too not drive. Driverless cars are not yet ready to function and Im guessing they will never be. Diverless cars will casue to much problems. You never know when something can go wrong. The article states that the car notifys the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, the driver could be sleeping and not hear it and maybe cause a crash. If the car is diverless then the car needs no human skill to function it in tough situations. The car can also cause traffic jams if the car breaks it will automatically shut off since its broken. The car can only handle 25 mph so that means no freeways or public roads. also if your in a hurry how are you going to get there in time. The car will be to expensive, If the brakes dont work your going to have to reapir them right away. If the sterring decides not work properly will the car is operating things can go down hill. A bmw part can cuase up to a million dollars imagine repairng the driverless car proberly like 20 million. They say the want to make driverless cars a taxi how much will it cost to get a ride and who will be responsible if the car crashes will your in it. Imagine buying a driverless car and you dont even drive it and get in an accident and you are responsible for the damage. From my point of view it has to be the companies since the owner is not tecnically driving. I would be pretty mad if i had to pay for the damage,the car is driving itself and the companies program it to do that. Imagine how much the car will cost and the insurace,alot of money. Driverless cars is not a good idea in our world becuase its not safe. The car can only go 25 mph and you need to stay alerted 24/7, I rather drive than let a car drive for me. People will feel safer if a human operates it than a machine. Driverless cars can cause accidents,traffic jams and even death. The driverless car doesnt know how to hands tough situations like roadblocks, tough traffic if you get pulled over will the vehical even pull over. If the car crashed I am pretty sure the company will have nothing to do with it since you bought it. The car can get in an acciedent and you didnt even drive but you still have to pay, I would be mad. Our society is not ready for this yet and hopefully they dont waste there money on something that can lead to bad things.

34

8afd92b

An earth like planet. Venus. And so close to, in space termonology that is. Venus isn't a easy plant to work with, espically with the weather changing rapidly. It's tough. But why do people really want to investigate it? Life. It can hold life on it. Not very easily and effecantly, but it can non the less. So why research so much about it and put millions of dollars towards funds for it? Venus at one point in time was the only planet in our solar systme very similar to Earth. It had the sustatial ecosystem our planet has, it didn't have an accesive amount of down ward gravitational pull and it wasn't in a constant chemical thermal storm or in high toxian heat levels. It probably had a huge ocean like ours and had other land masses on it, such like our continants. But why would we care to fund it so much if it's now in unsuitable conditions? We are trying to get human intelligents down there. We need samples of rocks, atmospheric gasses and even any life forms such as plants and/or animals. If we can find out what materials are already down on the surface, we can certify that we'll be able to make other forms of objects down there such as trees, buildings and cars. We need to know what kind of pressure would be experiancing. How much oxygen is down there. What kind and how much of gastro fuel we would need for high pressure compression suits. We need all of those answers, and we know how to get them, but not 100%. If the world were to end in 15 years and we knew about it ahead of time, there's a good chance we would find sulotions on how to get people up to Venus and possibly Mars as well. There's not enough time to know ahead, but we can always start preparing. So just like the old days in the race to the moon, we need to start helping NASA with their funds, researching ways to get up there, getting data, exploring new options and just not being afraid of what's out there. I know we're all afraid of going out into the unknown, but someday, we're going to have to go out there, and I rather be really prepared than not knowing what were even going for.

12

1ed0f53

Have you ever been sitting in class wondering what emotions the students around you are feeling? Have you ever wondered how to make things less boring and confusing in the classroom? Well now you can with the all new Facial Action Coding System. It's a system that can figure out the emotions that you are feeling just from your facial expressions. I feel as if this could help in the classroom but not as much as Dr. Huang thinks. I think that yes it would help with making class less boring and/ or confusing but it can also just lead to even more frustation or sadness. It also isn't going to help if you are sitting in front of an actual human teacher and not a computer. If a student if feeling strong emotions such as saddness or fear; they need to talk to a friend about it, someone they can trust, not a computer. So in conclusion, I give this system about a 50% chance of it helping in the classroom like Dr. Huang says it will. Theres just not really anything you can do to make school fun for someone that doesn't think its fun. I think it could help with other activities though, such as playing video games or watching videos.

12

d9d0ecc

Dear State Senator, I think that the Electoral College should be disposed of and the president should be elected through citizens' votes. I think this because Congress is biased. They don't have the same ideas as the citizens and can sometimes be difficult. It could be hard to compile the votes from the citizens and the votes from Congress because Congress could have a completely different view on the candidates than the citizens because they work for the government. I think it would be easier to just count up the citizens' votes and majority wins. Apparently Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agree with me. How it works is they add up all the citizens' votes and say who has the most, then add up Congress's votes and tell the winner. What happens sometimes is there is a winner of the citizens' votes, so who the citizens think should be the new president, then they add Congress's votes up and the president is the other person, not who the citizens want the president to be. How is that fair to the citizens? That would be a big problem because then they wouldn't like their president, there would be rebels, etc. It would not be pretty. For instance, in Texas, if you wanted to vote for one person, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors that would be pledged to that person. If the electors won the statewide election, they would go to congress and that person would get 34 electoral votes, but who are the electors? The citizens have no idea. They don't know who picks the electors or who the electors are, it depends on the state. The voters can't always control who their electors vote for. It's not their decision. I don't think that is fair to the citizens.  

23

488a448

At the time I was working two jobs as a grocier and a banker.Then people were asking if I could join the seagoing cowboys. So i said yes,then I asked my friend don. When don and I started on the ship with all the animals we felt wierd that we were just two small town boys doing this giant trip. Once we saw land I had just turned 18 before that. When Don and I hit land with all the animals we had to take them to all the villages and towns for all the people. We had to go back to the U.S. and get more and bring them to the other places like China, Venice italy. Venice was the most exiting place. It had streets that are full of water and the houses are on stilts, and people were very nice. Everything was beutiful and Don and i wish we had the opportunity to go again, maybe when were on one of are military trips.

12

c7e42ce

My thoughts on the google driverless car is simple. Once they are truly able to be autonomus and safe then you can put them out on the streets. So as of right now I think that they should not be on the streets. Stating my opinion and further explain I think that they will never get to a point full reliablity. But once they are affordable for the average person. I know that people will but them like hot cakes. But what happens when an coustomer that has a self driving car hits a person without a self driving car; the car company and every one involved in the accident will go to court and fight. The car company will come out on top though; the big name car company will fight so hard that they will get a bill passed that bans all humans from driving! This is also a reason that I am not for driverless cars. I dont want to be the person that is taken to the supreme court and goes against a big name car company, I dont wish that upon any one. I feel as If 90% is not enough for a car to be in charge. The car can not go through enough simulations to know how to travel through white out conditions, or even dangerous off road terrains. When you truly think about the cost and the time to get these on the road its not worth it. I would compare this to texting and driving how many teenagers had to die before we realised it was a problem? How many will have to die for this inovation. We are not ready for this technology yet... Or maybe we are to prepared for this. In this society hackers are becoming more and more dangerous. I know these autonomus cars will have to have google maps or be connceted to some kind of network. What happens when cars start getting hacked and maipulated what do we do about? What kind of insurance would be needed and how expensive would it be? Even though I am against this, I still reconginze that there could be positives to this. Every day driving tasks would be handled in a fluid and orgainzed manor. When you are in the car you could truly connect with the people inside. Long trips would turn into exiting family times. There would be no need for all seats of a car facing forward. Now refelecting on what I wrote I have realised that there is more that just safety in Inovative decisions. You have to consider what the majority of the people want. I know that many people will like this idea. My generation would be all over this, we are just a bunch of lazy tech heads. I think that self driving cars will connect with many people. Many people exept for me.

23

c0c92f8

Hello, my name is Luke and I am a former "Seagoing Cowboy." What is a "Seagoing Cowboy", you ask? It is a member of United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA.) Our job is to keep an eye on the cows and horses that go overseas. If you ever get a chance to become a Seagoing Cowboy, trust me, you will NOT want to miss it. One of the reasons I enjoyed being a member of UNRRA so much is that it gave me a chance to build friendships and communities with other countries. I think that is a very important thing to have because without that bond, you might beome enemies and go to war. Another thing that I enjoyed was just life as a Seagoing Cowbiy in general! For starters, I LOVE farm animals so I had no problem with watching a bunch of cows and horses all day. Not to mention that the scenery is absoloutly gorgous! I got to see plenty of astounding sights such as the Panama Canal and the Acropolis in Greece. In conclusion, being a member of UNRRA is and oppertunity you don't want to miss. You get to spend time with animals, see epic scenery, and most importantly, build a bond with other communites. I had so much fun as a Seagoing Cowboy, and I know ypu will too.

23

82ff8fe

The Face on Mars was not made from an ancient alian civilization. We have proof of this because our cameras are ten times sharper than the cameras we had to orginally photograph the face, the shadows just create an illusion that the formation is a face, and the Face on Mars has been confirmed to just be a mesa. The first photo we had of the Face on Mars was taken in 1976 by Viking 1, which would not have had the most advanced cameras. The photo is blurry and unclear, not a very reliable source to base alien belief on. Even the photo in 1998, "snapped a picture ten times sharper than the orginal Viking phtos." Compare the photo from 1976 to the photo taken in 2001. The 2001 photo clearly shows that the Face on Mars is in fact not a face at all. Any belief that the Face on Mars was created by aliens should now be wiped away because of how clearly the photo shows that the Face is just a landform. When the original photos were taken in 1976, there was the illusion that there was a face staring right back at the Viking 1. Shadows around the Face created this illusion that made it look like and Egyptian Pharaoh. When the 1976 photo was released for people to see, the caption read, "huge rock formation . . . which resembles a human head . . . formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Even the experts immediately recognized the Face on Mars as just a natural landform with shadows. Though some people believed the Face was an alien artifact, this theory is disproved quickly because in truth the Face on Mars is just a mesa. The Face on Mars is in the area of Mars known as Cydonia. Cydonia is known for having lots of Martian mesas. Martian mesas are very similar to mesas or buttes found in the American West. Chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program Jim Garving quotes, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." Which is a lava dome the takes the form of an isolated mesa, and is approximately the same hight as the mesa known as the Face on Mars. Though some theorists still believe that the Face on Mars was created by aliens, it turns out to be just a Martian equivalent of a mesa. This is proved true by the advanced camera quality, the proof that it was just shadows creating the illusion that the Face on Mars was actually a face, and the fact that the Face has been confirmed to just be a mesa.

34

66d946a

Have you ever been in class and started to get bored with an assignment? Well the new F.A.C.S (Facial Action Coding System) may be able to help. The F.A.C.S sytem is able to tell how you are feeling by reading the muscles in your face. The F.A.C.S system atrificially makes a 3-D model of your face with all 44 muscles. Those muscles are what help control your facial features for example, smiling, frowning and scowling. The F.A.C.S system is able to decode what muscles are being used to show how you are feeling. The argument about having F.A.C.S in our school systems today is that it is constantly reading our childrens faces without them knowing. People say this is an invasion of privacy for example if a child is at home and has left their computer out when they went to go to the restroom and a parent walks up and looks at the screen it could have some teachers thinking that the students parent is doing the work for them. I say this argument is invalid because a lot of people don't know that Google has a system in place similar to F.A.C.S where it will listen in on what people are saying and show advertisements that correnspond with that. Another thing Google does that is similar to F.A.C.S is that when you are browsing it will track what you click on and then provide advertisements for those things as well. Another example of things tracking us without knowing is that they're reports that the FBI has monitored people through their webcams if they are under suspect. With this knowledge what is the odds a hacker or someone with computer knowledge has not done this to other people as well? This is why I say the argument is invalid for F.A.C.S not to be in our school systems today. The other side of this argument that I can support is that sometimes our kids are having bad days and with F.A.C.S monitoring them it causes them to get advertisements that make their days even worse. This could possibly cause our kids to not want to use the internet that has helped them so much and is a facle point in most schools today. Another reason why F.A.C.S might be bad for schools is that it can teach our kids how to fake an emotion to be able to hide something from us or be able to cheat the system and be able to get what they want. This is some of the reasons why F.A.C.S might be bad in our school systems. Being bored in school can come easy at times, so the F.A.C.S system may be able to help your kid one day by making their day better. By being able to moniter the facial expressions our children have. Hopefully one day F.A.C.S can be used for crimes, mysteries, and even enjoyment;but for now it is a good sytem that is helpful for few but the help it provides is great.

23

cff14e2

Venus is an extremely inhabitable environment for people. Although Venus is alike Earth in many ways, it has plenty of risk factors as well. In this text, the author makes it clear that there are bountiful amounts of information on Venus that humans could collect, but it is far too dangerous. He shows that we could find so much worthy evidence and history on this planet but it is simply too extreme. He makes note that even though it can reach 800 degrees, astronauts should still pursue the idea. In the text the author states "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors" (The Challenge of Exploring Venus). This shows that getting into Venus could potentially help NASA dig deeper into other planets. A whole world of information is neighboring our planet every day. The author also states "imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way" (The Challenge of Exploring Venus). This shows we could still escape the harsh climate to get needed information. Venus is an incredible planet, and with time humans will be able to explore it. This text shows strong proof that traveling there is worthy. With the technology we have today, the day NASA decides to go to Venus is just around the corner.

23

308e4ca

Driverless cars are a dangerous thing that this society doesn't need. Driverless cars aren't completley driverless. They just stop doing their own thing as soon as they need the human help, this could cause accidents, tragic deaths, and lots of money from whoever is responsible. Are driverless, safe, cars really possible? In 2009 the first "driverless" car could drive under specific conditions. It even drove "half a million miles without a crash". They still require a human driver to take over whenever pulling in and out of driveways. The driver also has to drive whenever there is roadwork or accidents, because the driverless cars aren't capable of figuring out where to go by themselves. The awesome cars on tv that drive all by themselves with no probelm really aren't a reality for us. Some have hope that one day driverless cars may really happen, because of how far we've come with research and improvements. In the 1950s General Motors made a car that could drive on a special track, but the tracik was imbedded with electrical cable. This sent radio waves to the car to help direct it. Berkeley engineers tried something like this, they made it so the car could read positive and negative polarity in binary code. These experiments worked really well, but in order for that to work around the world we would have to upgrade every exsisting road. That's way to expensive and quite frankly to much to ask for such a new kind of technology. In order to have driverless cars without changing every road in the world they would need lots of sensors. One sensor on the reer wheel, roof, rearview mirror, gps, inertial motion, and four automotive radar sensors. The combination of these sensors is supposed to mimic the skills of a human driving. We've used speed sensors before in the 1980s to create antilock brakes. These sensors over the time span of ten years became so advanced that they can detect out of control skids or rollovers. In 2013 BMW developed a new car that has traffic jam assistance, they say the car can handle speeds up to 25 mph, but the car still requires the driver to keep hold of the wheel. None of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. These cars have been givent he ability to steer, accelerate, and bake themselves, but they all still need a driver to alert when they can no longer handle the situation. The driver has to remain alert at all times, and be ready to take over at a moments notice. Manufacturers are considering using cameras insure the driver is watching the road while the car watches the driver. Some manufacteres and drivers are afraid that the driver will get bored with only being able to drive half of the time. So they want to provide these cars with in-car entertainment, but still have a way to inform the driver that they need to take over, and will instantly shut the entertainment off. Traffic laws are made so that a car being driven by a human is the only safe way because they have control at all times. Some states fear accidents so they have banned even test driving these cars. These states would include California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia. Even if traffic laws were to change, new laws would still be needed. These laws would need to cover liability in case the car got into an accident, because the new technology failed. If that were to happen people fear there would be huge fights over who is responsible for the damage. The manufacter or the person who was "driving." Telsa believes the 2016 project will be sucessful because they are creating a car that has the ability to drive 90 percent of the time. Still the car is not driverless. Driverless cars are more harm than they are good. Sure they may save money on gas, but they would require a lot more attention than a normal car. Driving in a normal car you know you have to be alert all the time. In a "driverless" car you don't, but If it were me i'd be more alert because i'd be afraid that all of a sudden the car isn't going to handle what's going on and turn the responsibility over to me. This would cause lots of stress and anxiety whenever trying to drive. Driverless cars just aren't something we need.

45

5791fc9

If we reduce how often we drive a car it can benefit us, because using a car too often can have negative affects on our health, and our enviroment, and the cost is exspensive. To begin with using a car too often can have negative affects on our health, because If we depend on cars too much it can cause us to feel stressed and tense. We can not go outside and take a walk because the rodes are too packed. Being able to even walk outside to a store has become more difficult because stores are being placed far away. But if we reduce cars then stores will become more accessible to us because they will only be a walk away. So that we can excersize and feel less stressed about depending on a car too much to go anywhere. In addtion our enviroment is being destroyed each day because we are spreading gas in the air that comes from cars. But in a community called Vauban, Germany they are making efforts  to not use cars. There are only two places where you are allowed to park. Finally, the costs of cars are to high for people to be able to afford them.   

23

c9eaef7

Overly usage of cars not only has drastically harmed the environment but humans as well. This is why many countries have now leaned towards limiting the usage of cars. It might seem absurd especially if you heavily depend on your car to get to places, but the truth is cars harm. They're killing our world and therefore they're killing us. Cars release carbon monoxide into the atmosphere. If humans or any other living beings are heavily exposed to such gas they will die. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12% of greenhouse emission in Europe...50% in the U.S"(source1,p.5). Everytime we turn on our car engines we are harming ourselves. For small countries with little abundance of cars this might not be alarming at all. For huge economic countries such as the United States and France, car abundance is a serious deal. "Congestion was down 60% in the capital of France"(source2,p.14). The more abundant cars are the faster we are deteriorating ourselves. Cars cause broken acidents, broken highways, and heavy traffic, which leads to...acidents. Either way cars cause death so we might as well not have them at all. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Getting on a car is dangerous from whichever way you look at it. There's either angry drivers, drunk drivers, crazy drivers, and you're emitting monoxide gas. A world without cars is like our own little "world peace". No cars would mean more space, simple as that. "Parks and sports centers would bloom"(source3,p.28). People would have more places to visit and spend time with family and friends. "Restaurants and shopping districts have cropped"(source3, p. 28). We woulld have safer and prettier landscapes. A healthy yet fun world."Pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety"(source4, p.43). Many cars lead to heavy traffic which causes people to freak out and speed. No cars would mean that people would begin finding local jobs. Jobs that they could go by walking, riding a bike, etc. We would be healthier because at the same time we are exercising, and keeping our air clean. Having less cars is better for us in any way you look at it. Limiting car usage means we would have a safer environment to live in. There would be more space for fun recreational areas. And our lives would be less at stake. Our bodies would be healthier as well as the world that we live in. Limiting cars sets better steps for the next generations to come.

23

f3fd856

In the passage, it talked about this new technology that can break down your facial expression and figure out your mood. In this case, they did Mona Lisa. They said, her face was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, and 2 percent angry. I dont know they are to come up with these percentages. I feel like this technology can come into good use, although, i just dont really see the importants of it. In cases like this one, with Mona Lisa, yes i feel as if it was a great thing, but i just dont see any other good uses for it. I would really like to find out another use for this technology to be able to think it is very useful. I do think this technology is very interesting. I like how it broke up Mona Lisas face into three different emotions. I think that is very cool. I dont see any other use for the technology, but if it is just used for paintings, i think it could be kinda useful. I would like to see the technology in action more to see what all it can do. I want to see it figure out peoples emotions by the look on their face. I hope to see more of this technology in the future. I would also like to know who the inventors of this technology are. You would have to be very smart to be able to invent something like this.

12

f1eec22

The Face on Mars was not created by aliens. It is simply a natural landform. It was just giving the illusion of a real human face. Here are some reasons why. They thought it would be a good way to engage the public by giving the liiusion of eyes,nose,and mouth. They wanted people to be interested and it worked. On April 5,1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia and realized it was no alien monument after all. The picture was ten times clearier than the other ones. Skeptics assumed alien markings were hidden by haze. But that's not true. Just like any other landforms it would be hard to see. It's hard work to target cydonia. Whenever they get a chance tot they try to capture it. In 2001 they captured a even better picture. It was like Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shack. But it was really a Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa- landforms common around the American West. It looks like the Snake River Plain of Idaho. Most peopel didn't believe or want to beieve it. They thought the aliens created it because you could not really see the face. The 1.56 meters,compared to 43 meters per pixel is the best 1976 Viking photo. So whatever they were seeing was an illusion. There's no alien monument on the face so it has to be a landform. So the Face on Mars was not created by aliens because there's evidence that is a landform. All the pictures saw landform,no alien monument,and everything else was just an illusion. That's why the Face on Mars was not created by aliens.

23

889d496

The Electoral colleg is a process in which the electors from the state pick the cannidate they want according to who has the popular vote. Which can also be a very biased process. The Electoral College is not registered or monitered enough because if an elector from the state wanted to pick who they want to win they could and there isn't really anything to stop them from doing so. We the people should do away with the Electoral College and instead switch to a more regulated system like majority voting. whichever cannidate that gets the most votes from the U.S. takes the win. that way we wouldnt have to worry about our electors for the states being sneaky because there wont be any electors. State legislature is responsible for picking the electors and the electors sometimes defy the will of the people and cast the vote for who they want to win just like when Richard Nixon only validated his opponets electors in 1960. The Electoral College would be a more just way of voting if the electors were well monitored and if every state shared the same weight in the vote but unfortunatley, it's not like that so it needs to be done away with. The Electoral College is a unrestricted and very poorly regulated process, and it is a very unfair process. Because of the winner-take-all system. In 1968, if 41,971 voters voted a diffrent way the election would have been deadlocked. In 1976, if roughkly 5,500 voters in Ohio and about 3,600 voters in Hawaii had voted for a diffrent person the election would have been a tie. And usually the bigger states are the only ones to actually see their cannidates because the cannidates dont neccesarily visit states with very few electoral votes because they wont help them as much instead, they visit the "swing states", the states that have a bigger weight in the presidential election. However, on the other side the people that want to keep it are the ones that look at the few good things not the bad things. Of those helpful things that comes with the electoral college is it majorly decreases the chance of a run-off election in which no cannidate receives a majority of the votes cast. The Electoral college also puts out a certainty of outcome because there is less likely to be a dispute over the outcome in a popular vote then a dispute over an Electoral College vote. Of course, in life there is always at least some good in things like the Electoral College but in this situation is does more harm then good. It is an overall unfair process because some states are less noticed because of how few electoral votes they hold and also because of the electors not being monitered on the vote they cast for their state. The Electoral College should be doen away with and as a united country we shall adopt a more fair, equal , and all together well monitered system of voting.

34

1cd7165

I think that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. Most people think that all you do is work, like taking care of animals. However, there are ways for you to have fun while working. You can play games, read a book, or even see cool sights. Here are a couple of things you could do. First of all, you can see many different sights and explore while traveling. I know that I have visited some really cool places, like seeing an excavated castle in Crete. You can also see many different things. You could see the beautiful, wavy water or see a beautiful sunset while you travel. Another place I think you should visit is the Panama Canal. So, if you ever get bored and don't anything else to do, you should some beautiful sights and marvelous places. You may never know what you see and even make new friends along the way. Second of all, you could play games if you get bored. The Seagoing Cowboys program isn't just all about working for animals. It's about having fun and playing games. For example, I know when I joined the Seagoing Cowboys, we would play games, like table tennis, baseball, and even volleyball. You could also read too, if you would like. Where would you play these games, you ask? Back then, we would play in the empty holes where the animals have been housed. Third of all, you could just have fun. You could read a book, play games, or even relax. Talk to the animals while you take care of them. If all you do is work and no fun, then you are going to not like being part of the Seagoing Cowboys. I remember when I did do a lot of fun stuff, but I had to do work first. I would like to tell you a very good story. One rainy night, after making my hourly report to the captain, I fell down the steps, but luckily I made it okay. I just couldn't work a couple of days because I had cracked ribs. Trust me on this point. If you say to people that you had a great time, they would probably want to join too. In conclusion, I made very good and understanding points. First, go visit some sights and places while you explore. Not only could you explore new worlds, but you could also meet new people and try out different languages. Second of all, you could play games. If you play games like volleyball and baseball, you will be more happier when you play games that if you just do work all the time and not have any fun. You will get bored and most likely not enjoy yourself all that much. Third of all, have fun. You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program for these reasons. Hope to see you there!

34

d34e7d3

We shouldnt have driveless cars because if we do you know people arent gonna pay attention there gonna be on there phones and be like oh my car is driving its self so i dont really have to pay attention. and then some people who have gotten their liscense provoked can probably just hop in one of those cars and probably put everyone in danger. people shouldnt have to always depend on technology and other machines to always do something for them . the way driving is now is fine. the people say it will make it safer but how will it really they will have to spend billions of dollars probably on money that they probably dont have to create a whole new driving system for people and if it doesnt work the all that money will go to waste. If people strat growing up in a generation where you dont ahev to drive and the car will drive for you what are they learning. NOTHING! becaus ethere just learnmng how to be aware with the car not how to actually drive. Yes technology is advancing but that doesnt mean that all the Technology is the safest. Cars something that you have to learn how to drive not just something that learns how to drive its self. kids shouldnt have to be glued to technology 24/7 unless you in school please books in school be so heavy i swear to god imma have back troubles when i get older we just need i pads in our school but no our schools poor af. Anyways back to the car thing. There reasoning is okay i guess but what happens when your driving onthe highway and your car senses something and stops automatically and everyone behing you is going 60 - 70 mph and crashes into you what happens then? Its okay to have like those little beepy sensors and the little camera in the back of your car so you can see whats behind yopu when you back out but having a driverless car just seems to risky. Another point is that there are so many other problems in this world beside trying to figure out how to advance car technology . why dont they use that money to try to help cure cancer or help people in need not trying to make money but instead give bck people trhese days only care about themselves and there stupid fancy driverless cars instead of thinking about a child who doesnt even know what a car is. People these days kep on making up more excuses to be lazy just drive your car your self . Kids are growing up in a world where there not gonna know how to do anything by themselves there always gonna depend on technology or something to help them through life. people honestly need to stop depending on technology to do everything for them its stupid i dont need my phone with me every second of the day unlike some kids i can actually put it up and i wouldnt need a car to drive me around because im not lazy i can drive myself. so many people are lazy and its so aggitating to know that people cant even freaking get in car and drive themselves they have to make technology to have the car drive its slef

34

84d33bd

If i was a NASA scientist discussing the fase with someone who thinks it was created by aliens i would tell them that the face was not mad by aliens because it could of bin made by dust and wind or a deid person from milions of years ago also it can be a rock formed as a face . first i think that the face could of ben made up of dust and wind along time ago because we do not know what was in mars for a long period of time untill we invented satelights, rocket ships and space shutls next i say it could of also ben a deid person. one of the resons i say this is because in space a deid bode can not row or reprodus . last but not lest a rock could of den formed or a medeor crash thes are some of the things why i think it could not be aliens.

12

9ac0f34

I believe that driveless cars are a bad idea . There are so many things that they still would have to improve before they would be safe. They arent totaly driveless anyway because you would have to stop and start driving when ever you come to construction or and accident on the road. Im going to tell you some reasons why i dont beleive they are a good idea. The first reason I dont believe that it is a good idea is because they dont know how to drive through construction or accidents that have happens on the road yet. You could be driving down the highway and as many accidents that happen you could just come around a turn aand then you would have to be watching very closley to know to start stearing the car. This could cause some mayjor issues as in causing other wrecks to happen. I know if I was driving down the road with a driveless car I would be kicked back an relacked. If you come apon a wreck though you could also be in a wreck because you were not ready. My second reason I don't think they are a good idea is because they wont have a clue who to blame if there was an accident. If you got in a wreck with someone would it be your fault or the other person or would it be the cars fault that you crashed? They wouldn't know who to blame for the wreck. If someone was to get killed in these cars the family and friends would blame it on the cars. They could have big problems with this because it may have been prevented if the car wasn't driveless. My third and final reason is what would be the price for these cars? I know that they most likley wont be affordable for some people. Yes, the rich could pay for this car because they have a lot of money and they dont have to worry about anything but thereselfs. What about the middle class and the poor? They already have to worry about there house payment and many other things. Will these cars be manditory for everyone to have so we don't have driveless cars and regular cars on the road at the same time? If so many people will have some serious trouble buying the vechile because they are short on money. This is why I believe that these driveless cars are not a good idea. Yes, some people may think they are the best thing ever. Some may just not care. I truley believe that we will be much safer and the other cars are more dependable if we just stayed with the old fashion you drive the care with a gas pedal and a brake. New technology is a good things but in this case I think that they are taking things a little too dar.

34

c09b50a

I think that having technology that can read emotions in a class room would be a good idea because it can show where kids tend to feel self consious about certian taskes they are asked to do. Some kids may feel excited to get up in front of their class to do a speech or presentation, while others may feel the need to hide. This can also help with social behaviors by showing how kids react when palying a competive game or trying to get along with others they may not know well. For kids who tend to be more quite in school communicating can be on the difficult side. By putting these technologies in PC's or other computers, teachers can help those students work on their skills based on where they tend to react. The author takls about how most human interaxtion is non-verbal. Their claim is "Most human communication is non-verbal, including emotional communication. So computers need to understand that to." Dr. Huang wnats to explain that maybe if the game can tell that the child paly is feeling frustated that the game system can help them through until they feel more confident. This kind of technology can indicate whether a person is actually happy or just faking it. The author writes, "They even indicate the differnece between a genuine smaile and a forced one." The computers can even go imdepth enough to prove that its faked based on the way that the muscles are reacting. As claimed by the author, "In the real smile, the zygomatic major (muscles that begin at your cheeck bones) lift the corners of your mouth." These emotion readers can indicate where and when a childs emotion can change. In conclusion, emotion readers can help teachers tell when kids feel differently about something even if they show a different expression. Although people may think they are being watched, adding these feature in school PC's would be a good idea. These features will help get a better understanding of what really puts pressure on students at any age and grade level. This will also help studies to see if somethings that are done in school are too much fo one to handle based on their age and emotions.

23

201523b

In the article the author talks about the ups and downs of getting to know venus as a planet and having human life live their. Now, even though their are good parts about exploring venus there are many bad and dangerous parts about venus. Like for example, in the begining of the article the author talks about how, every mission was unmanned because, they couldn't even surive on the planet for no longer than a few hours. Also , they even talk about how Venus has a thick atmosphere of nearly 97 percent carbon dixide and thatn just blankets venus.This tells us that we have a less chances of even surving on venus. Venus weather is also horrible their teamputer averge is over 800 degrees, they have things like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes , and frquent lighting strikes. I know that these are things that happen on earth nearly everyday or every now and then but, with all that plus the heat ; we might not even be able to surive on there. The author does talks about how we and ahve a ship orbiting or hovering over the planet safely but, researchers wouldn't be able to take samples of rocks,gas, or anything. So,what would be the point of even going down there if we can't even really explore it. The postive things about venus, is one: Venus is already one of our sister planet and is referred to as Earth's "Twin." It is the closest in distance, size ,destiney, and it even the most Eart-like planet in our solar system. So, we do have many things alike that well help [people feel better about even getting to explore venus. Another, thing is that in the article the author states that "we havent touched Venus in more than." Meaning that we don't know what down there things could have changed drasctically we would never know. The authour also includes, how the planet has a rocky surface of sediment and has many features such as valleys, mountains and craters; plus Venus was proplaby even cover in largely oceans that could have supported many forms of life.The author use these facts to show us what we can benfit form exploring venus.They evne put in how NASA is compeling the idea of sending researchers down to study Venus. The last thing the aouthor states is how we should'nt keep our limits small just becuase were afraid of the dangers that migh happen but we should expand them and think of them as challenges too. So,include Venus can be a worthy of studying and exploring. Just with a little more reseacher and better technogly; the authour shows us that we might actually have a chance of living on venus.

34

0c88bb6

It'd be better to stay with the Electoral College when it comes to voting for the president. They try to evenly distribute the votes with every state, they don't favor certain candidates, and they're better trained for voting. Overall the Electoral College tries to keeps things fair for everyone. The Electoral College so far hasn't made a big mistake or elect a horrible president, so there's no need to mess with the voting system. Without the Electoral College, California would have the most votes put in to elect a president. If there was no Electoral College all these little states like Rhode Island would have a hard time since their votes are rational compared to the big states like California. Richard A. Posner states "other things being equal, a large state get more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign than a small state does" which makes things fair for everyone in small states or large states. The one big problem with the Electoral College voting is that there's only 538 of them while the United States consists of over 300 million citizens which makes almost all of the U.S. not voting for their president but instead for the people who vote for them. Even though that is a pretty big problem, it does help keeps things fair when it comes to the favor of one candidate over the other. With the Electoral College, candidates that come from a certain region like the South aren't praised over more than a candidate from the North. If it were up to the citizens to choose, there'd be favor for candidates from different regions that represent them. Paragraph 19 says, "a candidate with only regional appeal is unlikely to be a successful president"(Posner,19). The same paragraph brings out that no region has enough votes from the Electoral College to elect a president. Within the Electoral College are people who are better suited to make the huge decision about who gets elected as president. If it were up to anyone to vote, then the whole system would be messed up. The Electoral College has electors who don't focus on candidates from their region or appearences but they focus on who they think would be able to run this nation the best. Even in most cases, the candidate with the more popular vote still wins. Along with that, the Electoral College tries to keep the electoral votes from being too close for disputes and ties. So overall the Electoral College is better for the people when voting for president. They try tp evenly distribute the votes with each state,they don't favor certain candidates, and they're better trained for voting. With the Electoral College, they try to keep things fair for everyone so that we can all be happy.

34

fc772da

"The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is an article focused on the topic of studying Venus and what diffculties can happen, but also the benefits and knowledge gained. The author describes how exploring Venus can be dangerous but can also help the Earth's population. The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well with evidence. The author supports the main idea well with evidence and details included in the article. At first, the author shows some of the dangers involved in exploring Venus, "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals" (3). This fact gives an example of a bad situation that people might go through if they explore Venus. The author uses this fact to remain unbiased and show both sides of the argument. Later in the article, the author says, "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... Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans" (5). This statement describes a solution to humans not being able to survive Venus's conditions. Exploring Venus is so important that scientests thought of ways to complete that mission safely. Lastly, the author states, "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth... Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel" (4). This realization illustrates how beneficial traveling to Venus is because it could be a planet that humans could use for habitation. Exploring Venus is necessary because the human population might need to use the planet in the future. It is always good to have a backup plan if something on Earth goes horribly wrong. Overall, facts listed in the text support the author's main idea and purpose. The main idea, that Venus is worthy to pursuit even with its dangerous elements, is supported and shown well by the author. The author does this by including facts and statements that keep the article unbiased and describe the incredible benefits of exploring Venus. The main point comes across well because it opens the readers' mind to the possibility of venturing to Venus and what it could do for our planet.

23

19953a8

Dear state senator, It is highly unlikely that you will read this, but hey it is worth a shot. There are many reasons as to why the Electoral College process should be used to elect the president of the United States and many reasons as to why the popular vote process should be used. For this same purpose, there is a controversy as to which process should be used. If I had a say into which should be used and which should not be used, I would rule in the favor of the popular vote process and not in the favor of the Electoral College process. The first reason as to why I would be in favor of the popular vote process is that in the Electoral College process, big states are being more effective than small states. This might lead the small states to not vote because they feeel that they would not make a difference. Source #3 claim the following, " So, other things being equal, a large state gets more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign than a small state does...." When bigger states have more electoral votes, the candidates will be lead to thinking that if they get the bigger states, for example California who gets 55 electoral votes, to be in their favor then they might have a bigger chance at winning which will have the small states, like Hawaii who only gets 3 electoral votes, thinking that they have no say as to who gets to be their president. This claim is supported by source #3 when it is stated, "  Knowing their vote will have no effect, they have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by popular vote". The second reason as to why I am not in the favor of the Electoral College process is because as said in source #3, " Voter is toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign- to really listen to the competing candidates- knowing that they are going to decide the election". Candidates mostly pay attention to states that have more electoral votes, this causes them to pay more attention to the bigger states and leave out the smaller ones, as already argued, some states get more electoral votes than others. Another reason why this is bad is because most states will not pay attention in the election because they will not make a difference. If popular vote were to be in action, then more people and citizens will pay attention because it will be a more interesting election since more epeople have a say and the candidates will pay attention to all states. Even the bigger states with more electoral votes know that they are the ones to basically decide the election. The popular vote process is more effective and fair for the United States in choosing the President. Most people can argue in that favor as well. If you qwant the elections to be fair, I supposwe that you will pay attention to the voice of thousands of citizens and you will be fair.         

34

a478f42

Venus is a dangerous beecause almost 97% of carbon dixoxide is covering the whole planet, the skies are highly corrosive in sulfuric acid. Humans have no chance to even stepping one foot on venus. The risk is very high that you will not survive. Humans and other space crafts will not last long on venus, The enviroment is not like earth. Scientist are concidering to visit Venus as an mission to explore the craters, mountains, valleys and other features Venus has to store. NASA is thinking about sending humans to study Venus. That would be survivable but the conditions wont be easy. Also, The tempature at or around Venus will be around 170 degrees fahrenheit. Nasa is working on having mechanical computers sent to Venus so they can study the surface and other things that come along. Scientist will need that computer to have all the safety features needed so they can get all the evidence needed for an explanation or answer, without the computer being destroyed by Venus's environment.

01

d799e31

The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers very effectively by discussing the dangers of Venus, comparing Earth and Venus, and bringing up innovative methods of getting past the obstacle of Venus' harsh conditions. The author brings up the dangers of exploration on Venus throughout the article. In Paragraph 3, he says, "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of out oceans and would liquefy many metals." It is explained that the atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide, the temperature is over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the geology and weather make up a dangerous environment. The author's use of these specific details and descriptions informs the reader how dangerous Venus really is, and sparks their curiousity for the benefits of exploring Venus. The author explains in Paragraph 4 that Venus was likely much like how Earth is now, with oceans and a supportive environment for the growth of living things. Today, Venus is rocky, with similar geographical features to Earth. By providing the reader with this information, the author helps build the understanding of the importance of Venus to humans on Earth. This new insight teaches readers that because Venus is so similar to Earth, it would be important to gain more knowledge on it. In Paragraph 5, the author talks about NASA's solution of using a floating vehicle to study Venus in survivable conditions. He later encourages people to view the risks as challenges that inspire innovation. Innovation leads to improved technology and better, more effective ways to gain knowledge on Venus. One example of this innovation is "simplified electronics made of silicon carbide." Another example is more work on mechanical computers, that "can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces." The author supported his idea that studying Venus is worth the risks by explaining all of the ways that scientists are working to improve methods of exploring Venus. This support is useful because it can inspire the reader and provide important information. In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author effectively supports his idea that studying Venus is worth the danger by listing those dangers, explaining benefits of gaining insight on Venus, and discussing the ways scientists are currently working towards better exploring technology.

23

eb73df2

In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author clearly presents positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. Comparing future driverless cars to today's taxis, the cars would only use half the fuel of today's public transportation. The cost of the driverless car may be expensive, due to the additional sensors and assistance that the car provides. Google has owned driverless cars for specific conditions. Their cars have driven abundance of miles without a crash, but these vehicles are not specifically driverless. When there is a conflict with pulling in and out of a driveways or traffic issues, the vehicle alerts the driver to take over. Many people would believe that driverless cars can make a positive impact on our future society. The text states, "For starters, they needed a whole lot of sensors." According to the text, a driverless car would have to have many sensors to be fully safe. That information is a pro to driving vehicles like these. The text also states, "The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone." This is an example that high-technology sensors can help prevent crashes from happening. Another example that the author presents positive aspects of driverless cars is that a car company, BMW, announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant." According to the text, "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold on the wheel." Many people would love the idea of driverless cars, but people also need to be reassured that they need to be alert when being in a driverless car. Many people will take advantage of the idea of having driverless cars, but people also need to be reminded that driving is serious to theirs' and others' health. The author also states that none of the cars developed so far are driverless. It is always best to make sure that people are aware of this information. The text also states, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." When a driver loses focuses when driving, that driver will be alerted when the road ahead requires human skills. The sensors will be ready to get the driver's attention whenever there are conflicts along the way. Drivers need to be prepared to take over at any time. Furthermore, manufacturers are considering to add heads-up displays in the vehicle. Although Google cars prove that driverless cars are safe to drive, people can argue that driverless cars could be expensive in the future. With all the technology, sensors, antilock brakes, and driver assistance, people will wonder if driverless cars are expensive. People should be able to have a vehicle that they can feel safe in. With this invention, people will have the urge to be able to own one. The text also states, "Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved." Furthermore, automakers will make sure that nothing will go wrong with this inevitable invention. All the evidence in the text illustrates that driverless cars will take over in the near future. Driverless cars will have a positive impact on our society. Driving will be safer for everyone with the advanced technology that has been invented. The idea of having driverless cars could be far from us, but with all these inventions, we are growing closer to fully have these advanced vehicles.

23

41549ae

In the article, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that "studying Venus is a worthy pursute despite the dangers it presents." I agree with this, I think that venus is worthy enough to study even though its has many dangers to the planet. One claim that "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" is that people send many spaceship to land on Venus, but no spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours. A piece of evidence from the text that supports my claim says, "Humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe ths issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." This supports my claim because Venus is a challenging planet for humans to sutdy because we can't get a spaceship to land without it crashing after a few hours. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents. A second claim that sudying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is presents" is that although Venus is much like our planet, we may not be able to survive in Venus. A piece of evidence from the text that supports my claim says, "On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenhiet, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own panet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encunter on earth." This supports my claim because Venus has the hottest surfface tempature of any plant in out solar system. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents. A third claim that "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" is that people trying to study cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anythng else, from a distnace unless they get up close. A piece of evidence that supports my claim says, "Hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmospere." Another piece of evidence from the text says, "Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus woud need to get up close and personal despite the risks." This evidence from the text supports my claim because, people trying to research Venus have a hrad time doing it unless they could get up close to the the planets surface. Many researchers are working on ways to make the machines last longer despite the risk it may have. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents. Overall, I support the authors suggestion that "studying Venus is a worthy pursute desite the dangers it presents." Venus is a worthy pursute desite the dangers it presents because researchers hve a lot to learn from this planet and what it has to hold. Just like it says in the text, "Our travles on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." I believe that when there are things that may be difficult, there will always be a way of getting throuh to it, There will always be someone willing to get through to it, despitte the dangers it presents.

34

e7ec99d

Mars, the Red Planet, has been thought to have lifeforms living on it for many years now, by many people. Yet there is no comfirmed evidence that there is life on Mars, or that there was life on Mars. The "face" located in Cydonia, is not a face of anything at all. It is only a mesa. That was naturaly occuring. If there was any life near the "face" on Mars, then the Mars Global Surveyor would have found something. I know what you are thinking. That NASA is hiding the fact that there are lifeforms or where lifeforms on Mars. If there were, then NASA would have told the world by know. It would help NASA if there was life out there in space. The picture that the Viking 1 spacecraft took in 1976, was to low of a resolution to be seen clearly. In 1998 when another Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia the crew snapped a picture that was ten times sharper than the origional Viking 1 photos. Revealing that the so called monument was a natural occuring landform. Yet many people like yourself, where not satisfied by this conclusion and thought that NASA was covering up the fact that there is or was alien life on Mars. NASA then prepared another mission to capture another image of the "face". NASA planed this mission for a cloudless sunny day in Cydonia in 2001, so they could get the clearest picture possible. NASA would not risk more money and lives if they already knew that there was life on Mars. It makes no sense. The team that went to capture another photograph, captured one that was the maximum resolution. It would have captured anything that looked out of the ordinary. Including lifeforms and anything they may have left behind. All of the facts point towards the face being a natural landform and not made by anything but nature. The picture shows the Martian equivalent of a mesa which are comonly found in the American West. One photograph showed what looked like a face. The other two photos, which were taken with better cameras at a higher resolution, show a mesa. The facts are showing that the "face" is not a face at all it is a naturaly occuring land form. If there was any signs of life, past or present. The Mars Global Surveyor would have found something in 2001. All of the facts point to having no lifeforms build this stucture on Mars. If there was any thing out of the ordinary with this mesa then it possibly could have been built by extraterrestrial life. But there was and is nothing out of the ordinary with the mesa. It is the same type of landform that occurs in the Western part of the United States of America. NASA would not cover up alien life if it was benifical. It is like you burning your money. It helps no one. There is no life on Mars and the "face" that you saw in 1976 is not a "face" made by lifeforms. It is a naturaly occuring landform.

45

a718c79

Cars aren't really necessary in a community. They burn gas and pollute the earth very frequently. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency promotes car reduced communities. Legislators are starting toact like they are cautious. One reason the cities without cars are better is because cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. diesel fuel was blamed since france has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up sixty seven percent of vehicles in frane, compared  to a fifty percent average of diesel engines in the rest of western Europe. Paris typically has more smog than the other countries so that means they have more cars. cars produce way too much smog because of automobiles. we should all just stop driving cars when its not necessary because the earth is gonna become trash because of it. public transit was free of charge from friday to monday according to BBC. Fr the first time two other colombian cities joined the event. A day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Begota int the mid nineteen nineties Parks and sport centers also have bloomed throughout the city, uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad smooth sidewalks. Rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic and new  

01

722827a

Emotions and being able to recognize them when they occur have a lot to do with our human ability to learn and pick up information. if perhaps, one is feeling confused, it would be much harder for them to be able to retain information being thrown at them. we see this a lot in the educational environment. At school, students must be attentive and ready to learn before they are actually able to start the process of learning. This goes hand-in-hand with the idea that schools, as well as the education system shoud pay more attention to students' emotions towards subjects, contrasting enthusiasm to pick up a new idea with boredom followed by inability to focus. This being said, the new software being used to detect emotion from facial expressions could be a rather helpful tool in the everyday classroom for years to come. Every student has a different set of feelings, all are complex creatures with opinions on subjects that could differentiate them from one another. Some are better at learning subjects they are more interested in while others have the ability to devote time into learning any subject that school has to throw at them. The point remaining is that none are the same and so, teaching methods for students should become more indivualized to fit each students unique learning style and ability. It is possible that the computerized Facial Action Coding System could aid in the process of making these learning styles more fit for each student rather than just having them for the masses. "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." Having a computer monitor to read emotions from facial expressions could display to teachers how each student reacts to the information that they are learning, allowing teachers to make adjustmants in their teaching styles where they see fit. This could give students the ability to learn more effectively for their feelings towards subjects as they are personalized based on reaction as they continue. The Facial Acting Coding System is a very complex process consisting not only of computer scientists but also of a team of psychologists using expertise to read peoples' emotions through their faces, using scientific evidence along the way. This could mean that, while it is a newer system, it is a well-proven one, making the classroom a good place to continue perfecting it. "The facial expression for each emotion are universal,' observes Dr. Huang, 'even though individuals ofren show varying degrees of expression' (like not smiling as broadly). Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements- in a real face or in the painted face of Monda Lisa. By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions (as in Davinci's masterpiece). Each expression is compared against a neutral face (showing no emotion)." This line from the informative piece displays the process of determining emotions through computer technologies. It shows that it is well-tested and understood by its administrators as well as those in support of it, gaining it credibility as a method tested and used. this means that, while it is a newer technology, it could be used in the classrooms to continue to perfect the software by gaining more facial expressions from students, making it even more effective for its participants. While the software detecting facial expressions is a good idea for countless reasons, it also has a few downfalls. One disadvantage of this technology could be its lack of other uses besides reading emotions of students as far as classrooms go. Some may argue that installation of this likely pricey software would not be worth the pay or the hassle of overall installation. To this, one could argue that allowing students to have a more personalized appraoch to learning should be enough to convince those against it that it is worthwhile. Students being able to learn in an environment as well as manner specifically tailored to their indivual learning abilities and styles will benefit us as a society not only in the future, as today's current students become tomorrow's important business officials and doctors, but also currently, as these students will have less stress devoted to worrying about trying to learn something they are disinterested in or simply don't understand. Altogether, the good outweigh the bad in this current argument. Computerized sytems used to understand and display human emotions do belong in today's classroom. The benefits of this approach are numerous for both teachers and students being effected as well as for the future when these students are more outspoken, functioning members of society. This can be displayed that, not only would these systems help students to become more able and excited to learn in their own way, but it would also allow teachers to more effectively complete their jobs by editing approaches to learning to fit each student's individual syle and ability. It is also a well-understood and well backed-up process with scientific study allowing direct research to show its credibiltiy. Having students using this technologuy could also allow for the technology to become more credible as more emotions of individuals are entered into the technology. Finally, the price of these systems would not matter in the long-run as this would be money invested into the future of society as these students grow with a solid, quality education. Altogether, the good outweigh all the downfalls in this experiment and it should be introduced into classrooms in the following years to improve the quality of education.

56

06743f8

As we all know driverless cars are coming. Do you agree with idea? and would you feel comfortabel ina driverless car?. Well im here to discuss with you why I don't think driverless cars are needed. The idea of having a driverless car is a fantastic idea until you begin to think about the consequences and similarities it has against cars we drive now. There's many differences but also a lot of similarities between both the driverless cars and the cars we drive now. Driverless cars are not a good because why create a car that drives on its own but still needs assistance from a person. Driveless cars does come with special sensors such as; position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor, but with all that technology why does it need assistance. The cars we drive today does not have all that fancy sensoring but it does have some that really comes in handy. Driverless cars can steet, 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. To save the stress of you having to take control of the wheel if you run into a problem than why not keep you car, the cars we drive now. Without any navigation or all that fancy stuff we will always have our eyes on the roads and knowing when to turn, stop, go and all that good stuff. No matter how good a driverless car sounds I still don't think its a god idea. I feel as if its just a waist of money and products when there's more importnat things going on in the world that still hven't been fixed. Driverless cars are safe until a drunk driver or a persons who's high off something get in a dosen't pay attention to what that navigator is telling you, the same with texting and driving. So why risk someone lives when if they are driving the cars we use now more people pay attention to the roads, not many drink and drive, more and more people everyday are paying attention to the roads.

23

27065ce

The Facial Action Coding System, or FACS, could be useful for school purposes, and may help students and teachers tremendously. On the otherhand, however, it is not perfect and may cause more issues than it solves. For school purposes, the FACS can be used to alter an online course, assessment, or even just a simple knowledge check, using facial expressions to determine if the students are confused, bored, or if they understand it. If they are confused, it may be altered to help them understand whatever it is they're working on. For someone who is bored, it may try to make an online course more interesting to grasp their attention. However, the FACS is not perfect. It may mistake a facial expression for the wrong emotion. This could result in issues involving altering an online assessment, or course. Some students may feign emotions, and make faces to do the easier course that's meant for students who require additional help. Also, students who take an online course may be confused about something else, not the course they're taking. The FACS will still read that expression as confusion and alter it because of that confusion. Altogether, I feel that these cons outweigh the pros too much, and I believe that the FACS should not be used for purposes such as an online course or assessment. Too much may go wrong too easily with the use of FACS.

23

0da206f

Electoral Congress Have you ever wondered how the government adds up the votes and determinds who the president is after the election? the Electoral College is a process made in the Constitution, a compromise between the election by Congress and the election by citizens. Most would say that the Electoral College is reguarded as an anachronism, a non-democratic way of selecting a president. Like every other thing in the world, people form their own opinions. There are pros and cons to everything, even the Electoral College. To begin with, the Electoral College is exactly what it sounds like. It is a group of highly educated people that come together every year during the presidental election and choose wisely who the want to become president and vice president. Once everyone is complete choosing who they select, they add them up and seperate them by each state. Keep in mind, each state only gets a certain number of electors, depending on how big the state is. For example, Florida, the state that I live in, gets 29 electoral votes, as to Hawii, which only gets four votes. Next, the Electoral College has its pros and cons. One con of the College is they have more of an impact on the choosing of the president than the actual citizens have. You would think that the people, including both sides of the political parties, would have more of a say on whome becomes the president for the next four to eight years. For instance, multiple people and groups such as Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commence, And the AFL-CIO have said and agreed on, "Abolishing the electoral college!". Lastly, we have many reasons why we keep the Electoral College. One reason is certainty of outcome, a president can have more citizen votes than the other, but the losing candidate can still win because of the electoral votes. Another reason this happens is because most states have a winner-take-all basis, meaning that the state chooses and the winning person with the most votes gets a state vote, even if you personally didn't vote for that person. Another reason why is because the U.S. has many larger states and the Electoral College balances it out for them. So as you see, the Electoral College is debatable on whether or not it is a good or bad thing. They have pros and cons like everything else in the world.   

12

d86e510

Have you ever thought about having a car that can drive around by themselvs? I am sure that there are some of you have got annoyed about you want to get to places but you can not drive. Now there is a saying about driverless cars, and it's really a cool and conceivable thing to see in our future generation. There things I will prove for my opinion of there should be a car like that in the future. I am on the side of there should be driverless cars in the future. Why? Cause I believed it will be convenience for people in daily life. It might not pass the law for now days but how will you know about the future? We as a human are the ones that can change our generation. Things got changed so fast and evolved day by days. If you didn't even try to how will you know it doesn't work out? My point of view to have driverless cars is they are convenience and futuristic. You got to change your stubborn and old mind of thinking toward the things you can or can't. Those are my ideas of why there should be driverless cars in the future. To have driverless cars are convenience and cool. You never know how things will turn out to be like. Which you got to step on the game, know what's coming, and live it and play it big. Be enlighten about what you wants to be and how you will change the generation to the next level, which the driverless cars could be one of yours begining.

12

ec636ad

Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers there is.It's a beautiful planet, yet its so dangerous.Venus isn't that close to the sun, but it's so hot to even pass by.Nothing can go through it even if a spaceship went through it, it will melt by the heat. NASA wants to investigate Venus more, but it's a challenge for them . They have been testing some electronics made out of silicon carbide, this material has lasted some three weeks under the chaos of Venus's surface. The reason why this planet is hard to explore is because it has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets.Another challenge is that the clouds have a highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The average temperature is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than our own planet. If we ever lived in these conditions, we won't even last for one bit. Besides the heat and atmosphere, the weather is very dangerous too. The weather would be like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes and it's like that.Venus was probably covered with large oceans and could of supported various forms of life. Until now, no one knows what lies in Venus. The planet has a rocky sediment even it features valleys, mountains, and craters. It can be another planet , us as humans can visit. To summarize this all, studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it has.There will be ways to handle the heat, the pressure, and weather.We should study Venus even if it's dangerous and we should not have doubts of not studying Venus. One day, we can study Venus and probably human beings can go visit Venus.Despite the dangers, we should risk it and see the beauty that lies in Venus.

23

0040e27

There are many reasons why you should join seagoing cowboys program. You would be helping your country. You'd be traveling around the world. Last you'd have lots of fun over seas. You'd be helping our country because when Luke was in seagoing cowboy program it was 1945 and world war 2 was happening in Europe and he had to those countries recover. Luke had to help the horses when the war was over to get people places and to work. If you were 18 or up you might be lucky and be drafted into the military service. The UNRRA would hire seagoing Cowboys to feed the horses cows and mules that were shipped overseas. You'd be traveling around they world like Luke did. It took Luke 2 weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast. You'd be traveling to China, Europe, Greece, and many more places. The only way you'd be good at this job is if you wouldn't get sea sick because if you are a seagoing cowboy told travel overseas a lot. You'd have fun overseas if you don't get seasick. You'd have many adventures. You'd have many stories to tell your friends and family. You'd been in countries you'd didn't think you'd be in. You'd be able to play games in the countries you visit in the seagoing Cowboys program. If you join the seagoing Cowboys program you'd love it. You'd be traveling. You'd be having fun. You'd be helping our country. So why don't you join our seagoing cowboy program. I bet you'd love to be in this program with all our helpful friends and family that want to try to help our country.

23

75ef893

Have you ever took a vacation into a large city to see someone you know, or live in one yourself? Well if you didn't already notice, every single day wether the weather is nice or stormy, there's always this layering dark gray haze in the sky of pollution combined with the sound and congestion of cars going to tons of different destinations. That right there would be a car polluted city, which has a smog problem because of the over use of auto mobiles which is extremely harmful to the environment and us as human beings. You're probably thinking "How do I stop using my car?" but the goal isn't to stop using auto mobiles, but maybe to....reduce it. One very big impact you can make is to "car pool" which you probably already do but maybe try if you try making it an every morning habit, like for example: You and your aquaintances go to the same destination for work, and you happen to live within a couple miles of them, if you have time you could pick them up and drop them off which would not only be much better for the environment, you would also be de-congesting traffic by keeping three or more cars off the road. Now imagine if everyone did it? The roads would be calm and empty, making transportation much faster or easier and create huge positive impact on the environment by reducing all those green house gases. Is the job or place you're heading too, four or less miles away, and you can't pay for that ridiculously priced gallon or two of gas every morning to start your car and you don't have any friends near by to "car pool"? The answer is simple and actually might get you there faster plus save you lots of money, it's biking there. Now you probably are thinking "That's completely undesirable to have to do that every day to go somewhere local". Here is why it's actually a huge advantage over driving that short distance, 1. You'll end up with more money at the end of the week by not buying gas, 2. You will get fit much faster because biking will burn calories just like running or working out would and 3. You can completely avoid congestion which definitely makes your life less stressful because trust me, no one wants to be late for something so close to them just because of car traffic. To conclude this, it's really ultimately your decison and if you would like to make a extraordinary positive impact on the environment, make your life easier or less stressful, then I'd do it, and maybe along the way you might become better friends with people you know by car pooling with them or become more fit and healthy by making biking just as routine as your car used to be every day for those short distance trips.  

23

85225fe

A cow boy who rode the waves was about a person who helped the envirment,the artical tells about a person not to give in to the bad. Then it tell you to belive so you can sugged. The man in this artical was a person who cares for nature so he joins the UNRRA to give supplies to people across in world war 2. His life changed in 1945 when world war 2 was over 44 nations joined together to form the UNRRA. the UNRRA hired him too check on the animales hourly and give a report to the captan of the ship. In Ausgust 14 1945 he came with 335 horses plus enough hay and oat to feed them . It took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from China in a mouth it took 2 weeks to cross. stalls had to be cleaned and more had to be done. In counclusion the cattle boat trip were an unbelievable opprotunity for a boy ,but because he belived and achevied is dreams he was a Cowboy of the sea who crossed the Atlantic ocean 16 times and the Pacific ocean twice to help peolpe affected by world war 2.

01

88e52a1

Dear Senator, We should keep the Electoral College but should change some of the rules. We should have a Congress that knows best about what we should do to make our country better. They should be wise with age and should know better than to elect someone who is no good for this country. The votes should be runned by the people and they should have a say if the person running to be President or Vice President should run at all. The people have the majority vote, so they should be able to have a say. It does take longer but it is what's right. We don't need to get rid of the Congress but we need to be better about who we put in the office to run our beautiful country. They need to come and show us who they really are. Visit a town and get them your vote. The Electoral College has done some good things in the past but we should change it. The Congress needs to be made up of people who know what is right and which canadite to choose as our President. If you are going to be in Congress and are voting for a specific party, then you need to stay in that party. The canadite is going to feel like you betrayed them after everything they have done for you. Just because your rich doesn't make it okay to betray what's right for this country. "But each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee (and that trust is rarely betrayed)" (In Defense of the Electoral College:Five reasons to keep our  despised method of choosing the President, Richard A. Posner). Through our troubled times, Congress has never stopped trying to make everything better. That is what this nation needs and hopes for. Do not get rid of the Electoral College because it helps us who to choose to run our nation. Just make some adjustments and this country will be the best it can be. Sincerely Yours, Gabriela.

12

74dfb32

All we talk about is being able to be our own person and to be able to do things on our own but having electoral college isn't gonna help with that. Electoral college is when you select a group of electors to chose who they want to be president and you choose the group of electors which you want. Every group of electors will have their own opinion on who they want to be president so you have to be very cautious on who you pick. Popular vote is a more independent way of letting us citizens know that we can be able to vote without the help of our electors. Senator, it would be outrageous for us to be so dependent on the electors when its unnecessary and we can vote on our own. There have been times when people choose the wrong electors and they can't go back to change it, so why not just vote on your own and have the ability for clarrification and honesty on who I vote for. I feel like having an electoral college is a waste of time and it's only making things more complicated. If you should have a system it should be one that makes peoples lives easier not even more stessful. Also the voters can't control who the electors vote for so you make be telling the electors one thing but they will be doing another. These are the things that us citizens need to thing about. Should we have to doubt our electors? no, we should trust that they will vote for the president that we asked them too. Voting for president is very serious because, that president will be representing where we live and what we stand for so it can't be something that we slack off on, it needs to be something that we are proud of and the only way thats going to happen is if we choose our own president without our electors to do that for us. Us citizens should be proud and honored that we have the opportunity to choose our president because not most people have that chance and electoral college will be taking that for granted. Popular vote assures that our vote counts and it gives us the independent character that we need to be strong. Senator, I think that if you want everyone to fell secure and trusted then you should keep using popular vote.

23

1f7a4d9

In the article 'The Challenge of Exploring Venus' the author mentions mutiple challenges of exploring the planet. Despite this, the author seems to support the further exploration of Venus. Later in the article, the author explains their reasoning. This essay will first analyize the author's statements at the beginning of the article. In the first paragraph of the article, the author explains that there are many different challenges that have prevented humans from sending a probe to explore Venus' surface. Later, in paragraph three, the author gives examples of said challenges. These include clouds of corrosive sulfuric acid, average temperatures of 800 degrees, incedibly high atmospheric pressure, and a heavy carbon atmosphere. (paragraph 3) These conditions on Venus have prevented humans from exploring the surface because a probe that is able to withstand this harsh enviornemnt does not exist. After the author expalins why Venus has not been explored, they then present a few ideas that could lead to a new innovation. In paragraph five, the author informs readers of an idea that NASA has come up with to explore Venus. The author describes this invention as a blimp-like vehicle that will hover above the planet's harsh surface. They reason that being able to explore Venus without having to touch the surface is possible due to thr more surviveable conditions of the atmosphere. The author reassures readers that traveling to Venus may be possible by explaining how technology could be invented to allow humans to survive the harsh enviornment. Towards the end of the article, the author also gives another possible breakthrough for these challenges. In paragraph seven, the author describes another disocvery from NASA. The innovation that is mentioned, silicon carbide, may have the potential to survive in the harsh conditions of Venus for three weeks. The author gives other possible ideas such as using more durable older computers that may be able to survive on Venus longer than modern technology. This shows that the author believes that the answer to exploring Venus may be closer than originally thought. The author of this article shows readers that they support the idea of traveling to Venus despite the current challenges. Throughout the article, the author provides many ideas that could possibly allow future probes to visit the planet's surface. Also, in paragraph eight the author desribes how they personally feel that dangers and doubts about traveling to Venus should not limit humans from exploring it. The Author cleary shows through this statement that they are positive that NASA will find a way to explore Venus.

34

bcbbbd3

As technology continues to advance, cars are seeing advancements in safety and driving capabilities that go further than what the driver can do. Cars the can sense when the car needs to break if the driver is distracted. Brakes that are anti-lock which means they distribute different amounts of braking pressure to wheels that may have more traction to prevent loss of control. All of these things are very good for cars and keeping drivers safe but are we close to seeing the "Driverless Car"? Cars have features now that can help or completely park themselves with the use of sensors. Many helpful gadgets that may help if human error occurs and can even prevent collisions. But then you have to also consider if this technology were to fail or have glitches that could be very dangerous. We can not know how these "smart cars" will age and how we can update the technology in them. It is definitely possible to create a self-driving car. Many different organizations have succesfully done it but on closed tracks. These tracks do not have the real world complications that can arise such as road work or accidents that cause the car to go on alternate paths because the original one is blocked. This is when the human must take over and redirect the car. Although there is this talk of a car that can drive without a human, we have not seen a car that is reliable and safe enough to be trusted without the driver being ready to take over when needed. If the driver has to sit at ready all the time then how is it a driverless car? As a driver, I know what I am capable of and I feel best when I am driving and I am in control. It would take a whole lot of trust for me to just turn my car on autopilot and let it take over considering there are many things that can happen while you are driving down the road. Many questions come up, such as, Will the car react in time? Will the technology even know to react? Will the car safely and controllably avoid whatever obsticle is thrown it's way. All these things change if the driver is sitting back not driving because the car apparently can do it all by itself. Eventually, in the future, it is very possible to see cars with an autopilot function or other self-driving techniques but we are a long way from cars driving without human help. Laws in all but four states make it illegal to use a car that drives itself because, "lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers" (Paragraph 9). So it is obvious that we have a ways to go from a legal standpoint until you will see cars driving themselves on these American roads. This set aside, the advancements in technology is doing wonderful things in the safety category. Cars can avoid collisions or alert drivers if they make mistakes like going over the center double yellow lines. This helps prevent the awful head on collision of two cars. In conclusion, we are not terribly far from cars driving themselves. It is more a safety and trust concern rather than the technology being there. Cars will drive themselves more and more but with the aid of the driver always being there and capable of taking over at any time. But does this make them self-driving if the driver must be present and paying attention at all times? Why not keep their attention by just letting the driver, you know, DRIVE?

23

9f93c72

The Face on Mars Have you ever seen the face on Mars? If so do you think it was a natural landform or alien made? So let's assume you think it is made by aliens and i think it wasnt. I think it wasnt because there have been things like this on earth but obviously not as big of a dent on earth. I personally think it was a natural thing like when clouds look like faces or random objects. People dont say clouds like that are made by aliens. The reason I think it isnt alien made is because there are things on Earth comparable to the face on Mars. We don't think those are alien made. We also see clouds everday that look like faces or random objects so therefore there isnt a diffrence between the two. The only difference being clouds are in the sky and the face on Mars is on Mars. Another thing you could also compare is the face on Mars to it the easter island heads. They are gigantic statues that kinda look like the face on Mars. A lot of people also say that those are alien made but other people could also argue they arent because they have an opinion. Most likely they will express there opinion too but it is a matter of opinion and no facts because there isnt way to tell if the face on Mars was made by aliens or not. You could belive that it was or not but evidence from paragraph 7 stating that on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfures were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web stie, revealing... a natural landform. There ended up being no monument after all. So that is my reason to believe that it was a natural landform.

23

ab4cdb9

I am against the development of driverless cars. I am against the development because "if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault?" There are many reasons why the development of driverless car are not safe. I am against the development of driverless cars because its could not be safe at all times, "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." Laws are written to keep people safe, if thats the law then driverless cars might not be safe. Driverless cars may not sound or look dangerous but you never know."In most states it is illegal even to test computer driven cars." It is illeagal in some states probably beacause they are not proven to be safe yet. If they were really safe I think that they would allow them to just test drive them. Laws about the driverless car are going to change if they do make a safe driverless car. The laws are probably still going to be strict ans safe. "Even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of in accident." If an accident did happen and there was no law who would be blamed for it, the driver shouldn't be because its a driverless car. "Television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves." Just because we see it in movies or tv shows doesn't mean it real or safe. There are some good things about driverless cars, but there are alot more thing that are bad or just not safe about them.

23

f5f56fb

Studying Venus is a very worthy pusuit. To study Venus we could learn so much more information than we already have. Venus is said to be the closets realtion to Earth but we cant prove that unless we go explore it. In the Article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author describes Venus as a very dangerous place full of many challenges that could extreamly hurt anyone trying to explore it. Venus has challenges like air pressure, heat, earthquakes, lighting strikes to probes, volcanos, storms, radiation, and highly corrosive sulfuric acid clouds. The heat on the surface of the planet is said to be close to 800° Fahrenheit and the pressure is 90 times greater than it is on Earth. Because of these factors it is almost immposible to be explored by any human. Venus should still be explored because there are so many things we need to find out about it. The planet Venus "might have at one point been the most earth like planet in our solar system"(paragraph 4). This is something that would be extreamly important to find out since is could have recources like water and minerals living on the surface. It is also not for sure but "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth"(paragragh 4). This is something that could help scientist to determine if or what life forms could have one survived there. This could also help scientists figure out how other planets eco-systems work and thrive. Although that would be great to find out, the dangers are so high on the planet that it would be almost impossible to figure out. However, some solutions are there. one solution would be to "allow scientists to float above the fray"(paragraph 5). This means scientist and explorers would float about the clouds and the surface of Venus and examine it from the top. Doing this would keep everything away from the person and make their travels safer. At that level "the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth"(paragraph 5). The dangers from the air would be significantly less than that at surface level. This is a very plausable solution that would help us explore and keep science safe. Venus is a planet that needs to be explored despite the dangers. It would be very profound to science and would help us understand how it use to be in the past, as well as how it has changed over hears. It would be a risky mission but thanks to science and engineering there are always possible solutions to keep everyone semi safe and explore all that we can.

34

7b199f3

Dear state senator, I do not agree with the idea of the electoral college. The United States' president should be elected by popular vote and not just by a specific amount of electors. One great reason why the president of the US should be elected by popular vote is because the citizens won't really get to choose what president that they want to have for the next one or two terms. It is also unfair to the people that vote for their president (according to source 2.) We should really stick to the president being elected by popular vote. The president should be elected by popular vote because the people are practically not voting for their president. The majority of voter aren't voting for the president, but they're voting for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president(as said in source 2.) The electors that actually elect the president can be anyone not holding public office. The citizens that vote can not always control whom their electors vote for. It's official that the electoral college is also unfair to voters. Voters are voting for other electors to then elect the president. What if to say there was a tie after voting for the candidates? The election would be handed down to the House of Representatives, where the state delegations vote on the president. The electoral college is also unfair because of the win-take-all system in each state. Candidates won't stay in states where they know they a zero percent chance of winning, they'll only focus on the states with tight races. So there is why I agree that the electoral college should be abolished and the government should change the voting system so that the president is voted by popular vote. We need to abolish the electoral college because the presidents that are being elected are not being elected by the citizens, but instead the president is elected by the electors that are elected by the citizens. The electoral college process should go no further because it is unfair, outdated, and irrational. I really long to see a change in voting systems soon.    

23

f690002

I dont agree that we should have driveless cars. There's a lot of things that can go wrong if we have driveless cars. It could malfunction on the road. Would people get bored while the car is driving itself? Even if we wanted driveless, it would take years to test to make sure that it works properly so we dont have any casualties. How much money would all this technology cost? Will people be able to afford these cars? I think it's a good idea to have sensors, cameras, and alarms or vibrartions to alert the driver so there can be less accidents. I'm going to be discussing why I don't agree with drivless cars, what would happen if we got driveless cars, and what improvements could be on the cars. I don't feel safe with driveless cars because when it comes technology anything can go wrong. It could malfunction and if it happens while your're on the road, you could be endangering yourself and those around you. To other people it made sound nice to relax while your car drives you, but I would feel safer if it was just me driving the car myself. I feel like the only reason people are coming up with driveless cars is because of how many accidents we get per year. Mostly because of people drinnking and driving or people texting and driving. If people would just focus on the road and not speed, we would not have so many accidents. That's the reason why I don't agree with driveless cars. I think that we would probably have a lot of accidents if we have driveless cars. There has been times when technology just randomly malfunctions which can sometimes involve death. While your on the road something can wrong and you might not be able to do anything because you have no control over the car. We also got to think about how much all this technology would cost and would people be able to afford these cars. People might enjoy driving themselves and may not want a car driving them. People could get bored depending on their destination. There's not really much to say but that its's dangerous to use drivelss cars. If we were to use driveless cars, it would take a lot of testing and time to make sure its safe, but for now we can't really trust it until it has been properly tested. I think it's a good idea to have a lot of technology on the car to make sure the roads are safe and we have less or no accidents. The idea of having sensors, alarms, and cameras because that can help us a lot to prevent accidents. If you're about to crash into a car it will have ana alarm to let you know you're about to hit a carpr have automatic brakes. The cameras can help you to see whose around you. This can help you when your making a turn or when you switch lanes. I agree with having improved cars but i don't agree on having driveless cars. Those are the improvements that the cars should have to help us to stay safe and drive better. This is my opinion on what I think on driveless cars. I dont agree that we should have driveless cars and that we should just stick to the regular cars that we have right now. I talked about why we should'nt have driveless cars, what could happen if we have driveless cars, and what improvements should be on a car.

23

a4b3e4e

Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because its alway good to know, not only about the moon and earth, but our whole solar system and how each planets works. Venus is known as the"Evening Star".Venus, however is the second planet from our sun.It could be very challenging for us to discover venus because of the acid in the air and how high the temperature can get,consequently one day we'll have a chance to discover what really goes on in Venus. In "The challenge of Exploring Venus", paragraph 4 opens up about how Venus is probably covered with various oceans and could support various forms of life, like earth today. We can find something important in the planet of Venus such as curing any possible diseases, flu's,etc. About 97 percent of carbon dioxide covers Venus,temperatures average to about 800 degrees amd about 90 times greater than what we originally experience.If we can discover the moon with certain risks, then why can't we test out Venus? We can think of Venus as another challenge we've faced in our lives. Most researchers have been working on innovations that can allow machines to last long enough to get the knowledge we'd need about Venus. If we started the beginning of research now, why would we stop halfway?NASA has been working on some things such as:Simplified electronics made of silicon carbide that has been tested in a chamber simulating venus's surface.So far that electronic has lasted three weeks. Another device they've focused on to help get closer to venus would be mechanical computers, envisioned in the 1800s.The computers can make calculations for gears and levers, although we might have to watch out because in venus the air is acidic which can ruin the mechancial computers. There are many challenges we are facing all around the would and Venus can be a good start to deciding on whether we'd like to discover some more new things. People in this world are meant to discover new dangers and doubts. We should feel the need to expand our knowledge of imagination and innvoation.

34

76648c5

The author starts by giving us examples how Earth and Venus are similar to eah other and giving us information how Venus could be a planet were they used to be life before. He or she was explaning the diffrences how the degrees are diffrent and their higher on Venus but he came to the conclusion that how it could be a livible planet. So on paragrah 5 the author says that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that they have the idea of sending people to explore it so this menas they are actually serious about this. The author explains how they are some bad stuff before sending people so they are comimg up with ideas how the mission can be complete with no failures so this mens that we have the knowledge but we dont have the right things to complete this mission. On paragraph 8 it blow my mind that hes actually right about how we are curios about anything we cant reach with our hands so we try harder to obtain the impossible, we have a huge universe but we will never be satisfy until we reach a dead end.

01

fe07656

NASA thinks that it was made by the planet being made because aliens do not exist. You can not just guess at how it was made. This is why NASA thinks you are wrong. Aliens could not have made this because they do not exist, it would take a long time to make anything that scale, and it would take them years to make. Aliens could not have made the face becasue they do not exist. This is why NASA thinks this. Aliens would have to have good construction and excavtion equipment. As you would say, they don't need that stuff they just built it. However, there is no physicaly possible way that they could have made it without the equipment. In order to build they would need this equipment. All together aliens could not have made this because they are not capable and do not exist. Aliens could not have made the face because it would take a long time to make anything that scale. Here is why they could not have done it. They don't have the capablities to make anything like the face on Mars. The people that think otherwise would say that it isn't a natural land form. However, NASA scientist where comparing it to other natural landforms. That is why NASA thinks that it is impossible for the aliens to make anything to that scale. Aliens could not have made the face becasue it would take to long. Here is why NASA is proving facts. This is not possible in any shape, way, or form because it would take over 300 years to do so. You would say that the aliens just bulit it as we bulid buliding today. But, they would have to have constrcution workers working every single day for this to happen and that is why NASA says it is impossible. Together that is why I do not think is is possible. In conclusion, aliens do not exist, do not have cababilatlies to make anything to that scale, and it would take to long that is why aliens could not have made this face. People get their hopes up about things to easily that is why NASA does not think any of this is even near possible. It would be better if NASA told evryone the full truth.

12

ca0ed2e

"The Challenging of Exploring Venus", many scientists are wanting to exlpore Venus atmosphere. But it comes with risk and danger, possibly NASA scientists can break through that though, Venus is 'Earth's twin", yet is a challenging planet for humans to study. Why? The thick atmosphere of 97% carbon dioxide blankets Venus, with a tempature over 800 degrees Farenheit and an atmospheric pressure 90 times greater than what we could or would ever expirence here on Earth. Not to mention the erupting volcanoes, powerful earhtquakes, frequent lightning, with the hottest tempature of any other planet; traveling would be indisputable. Venus at one point was "Eath like", the planet still has familiar features such as rocky sediment, valleys, mountains, and craters. Someway scientist have thought of some way to possibly research the mysterious planet, NASA has created a so called 'blimp' that would allow the scientists to be able to hover over Venus landscape 30 miles up. At 30 miles up, Venus would be at a 170 degrees Farenheit and pressure would be what it seems like at sea level on Earth. It is not easy conditions, but survivable for humans. Although, most forms of light can't penetrate the dense atmosphere, concerning standard forms of photography and videography ineffective or not clear. There would not be any samples of rock, gas, or anything else that would be of use. To have a thorough mission and search, you would have to get up close and personal, despite the risks, and danger. Creating a more resistant of objects that could sustain the pressure, heat and other forces. Venus is a difficult and dangerous planet to research, but perhaps one day scientists will be able to create the most effective way possible. "Imagination and Innovation, not Danger and Doubts"

12

2c35c89

Yes, I believe this technology is very useful. This could be used for a lot of different things, such as online and in the classroom. As it says in the article, "If you smile when a web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." This could totally change the internet, if you are'nt liking something you could just frown and it would either change it up or put something diffferent on the screen. Or for another instance, if you are watching youtube, and if you are'nt liking your video you just frown and they would show you a new video. This technology also can help in the classroom, if you are doing something online for a class and you got bored, the screening would change whatever was on your screen into something more entertaining that you may like, Dr. Huang predicts, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming bored or confused, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective instructor." I would like to see this happen, especially in the classroom. If i was doing a research project or a test or just an assignment online, i would rather have it change it to something more interesting. Although this could also hurt student academically, especially if they sratrt getting behind on their school work. This technology could also work for video games, if you are playing the same games over and over the console would be able to switch it up and allow you to play new/different games. This could definitely help improve video games, even if you did'nt own the game you wanted to play, it could let you play a free trial to see if you want to go ahead and buy it. For example, if you are playing a basketball game and start to get bored, the facial screening will see that and switch you into a different game. This technology could also put you more into the game in a way, it could possibly scan your face and put you into the game as one of the main characters. This facial screening technology is really cool, it just seems surreal that a computer can tell you exactly what empotions you are feeling. Just like with the Mona Lisa picture, the screening said that she was 83% happy, 9% disgusted, 6% fearful, and 2% angry. This screening can tell your exact emotions with exact percents, it can do all this just through a screen. The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of your face, and scans all 44 major muscles, Overall, I believe that this technology is very valuable to society, I mean being able to read emotions just rhough a screen is amazing. Dr. Paul Eckman did an amazing job creating F.A.C.S. (Facial Action Coding System), this system can classify six different emotions. Those emotions are happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness, and this system can also associate one of those emotions with your faciaL muscles.

34

d991ec4

Have you ever wanted to travel fun places like cross countries going to china or go to what ever country you wanted. Well there is a book about cowboys that cross crountries and lived there. Luke wants you to join the cowboy travel I know that luke wants to have fun. Luke Bomberguer had no idea that his life would change soon after his high school graduation. I think you should follow the cowboys because he just experiance many new fun things. He got to travel all the way to Europe and China. Wouldn't you wnat to travel chase your dreams and have fun. Lukes friend ask him did he want to and luke said yes , if you have job and you want to take a break then go with the cowboy and see how much fun you have. In August 14 they recived to report to New Oreans. The cattle boat trips are unbelieveable said luke. A opportunnity for a small town boy luke said again he had the side benfit of seeing Europe and china. I think you should do what ever you want. If you want to chase your dream you can do it. Hard work pays off luke did a 2 time part job. After that he got to go to many places and the most biggest is going to China and Europe. If you want it people you can do it.

12

651ed18

Would you change history? Some people think that there some things that were made by our past Presidents should be changed. Such as our Electoral College, people say it should be changed to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. So we shouldn't change history we should keep the Electoral College. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A  majority of 270 electoral votes is requested to elect the president. Our states entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation. Now think about this if we were to go with this changing thing look at how many people would lose thier job. Therefore if the voting was by popular vote instead of by the Electoral College literally anybody could become President if there isn't anybody looking at it that knows what they are doing. After the Presidential election,your governer prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment" listing all of the candidates who ran for President in your state along with the names of their respected electors. the Certificate shows that the winning Presidential candidate in your state and shows which will represent your state at the meeting of the electors in december of the election year. So without the Electoral College to make the decision of the President the governer can't make the "Certificate of Ascertainment" the other people and there respected electors won't get noticed for running. Other people think that we should change the Electoral College to the election by popular vote. They think that under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president , but for a slate of electors , who in turn elect the president. For instance, if you lived in Texas and wanted to vote for whoever, you'd vote for a slate of 34 democratic electors pledged to that person. At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair. Because of the winner-takes-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. The Electoral College is widely regarded as anachronism,a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be[overuled] by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. But each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the part's nominee; however, it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. There are five reasons for retaining the Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigree; all are practical reasons, not liberal or conservaative reasons 1) Certainty of Outcome 2) Everyone's President 3) Swing States 4) Big States and 5)Avoid Run-Off Election.     

12

535617f

Have you ever thought about being a Seagoing Cowboy? We Seagoing Cowboys go on many adventures, do fun activities, and we also have many responsibilities. The Seagoing Cowboys go on many adventures almost every day. One adventure that we have done, was we to Europe. There are many other places thta we have gone to, for example, we went to China, New Orleans, Venice, and on our way to China we went to Crete. In Crete, we toured an excavated castle. In Venice, we went gondola riding. We also did many fun activities in our spare time. Us Cowboys play baseball and volleyball. We also had table-tennis tournaments, we fenced, boxed, read, and we played many other games. Not only do we do these activities, but we also liked to whittle. The Seagoing Cowboys didn't just do fun activities and have adventures, but we also had many responsibilities. There are different types of responsibilities that the Seagoing Cowboys have to do. One of these responsibilities is that we all took turns nightwatching. What a nightwatcher does is they have to check on the animals every hour and make hourly reports to the captain. We also had to feed and water the animals two or three times every day. The Seagoing Cowboys go on many adventure, we do activites to make the time pass by, and we have many responsibilities. The Seagoing Cowboys would probably be amusing to most people because a lot of people love animals. Not only do you take care of animals, but you would be able to see the world. Some people might not be too happy with this job, because in this job you have to sail over the Pacific and the Atlantic! I hope you all will want to sign up for this job, because I sure know that I would if I were all of you. I also hope that if you do sign up, you'll love this job as much as i do!

23

0d3b8e3

"Driverless Cars Are Coming" introduces the idea that driverless cars are almost ready. My argument of driverless cars is, are they ready? Who is to blame if an accident happens? The manufacturer or the owner? Which the narrator also asks, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer?" The premise of my argument, is that the driver, should in no way be the one at fault. Unless they themselves wreck the car. Driverless cars are a very unique sort of car. For one, they do not need a driver. In most cases, that is. Driverless cars have one factor that many car companies are working on: they also need a driver. Which makes them half driverless and half driver... full? BMW driverless cars can only go to about 25 mph (miles per hour), "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph," before needing assitance by the driver behind a wheel. GM has driver seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger, "...driver's seats that vibrate..." Also, the Google car just says whenever the person is required to take over. "...simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." What if a special needs/ disabled person uses one of these cars? Are the manufacturers going to blame them for not being able to use their own hands and feet on the vehicle? This is another scary thing that could very well happen in the future. At least a person without some kind of disability would have control of the car if the autopilot did indeed fail. My counter-argument to my argument would be that there are plenty of sensors around the car stated in paragraph 4, "...they needed a whole lot of sensors," but, what if the senors failed? What if every single sensor failed and someone was incapable of controlling the car? Who is responsible? My argument is not one that can be answered right now. It is just a question that many could use an answer from. The well-being and capability of the car is an important aspect of said car. Many bad accidents could happen and whether or not the accident is pinned on the car maker or the car driver is to be disputed.

23

72a4d46

Since new software is coming out, people are coming up with ideas on trying to see if people are hiding their emotions. The Mona Lisa is a great example on emotions, people want to know if she is smiling, frowning, or they want to know how she's feeling. The new software wants to calculate other people's emotions. People are beginning to make 3-D computer models of faces to see all of our muscles and to see how they move like a human does. As studies say we all have six normal emotions, we have happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness, and by showing that our facial movements change and move to show our emotion. An example on how we show our emotions are that if we raise our eyebrow to show that we are suprised on what another person has said or done, and another one is when people tighten their jaw and lip that shows that they're angry. The Mona Lisa is another great example because we don't know how she is feeling, we don't know if she is feeling sad, happy, depressed, or many more things. When you look in the mirror how do you look? People might see the stress on their face because lack of sleep, some others might see sadness because of a break up, and their are many other examples on this topic. Mirrors can't detect if we're sad, happy, scared, and more things becasue it's not a computer, we can detect if we're feeling a certain type of way. We should look at how our face looks when we look, we should look at how different our face changes when we go from happy to sad. When making a face it might make you feel happy or sad. The experiment and technology shows how people really feel. When people say, "put a smile on that face", it might make you smile or chuckle a little bit. Drama coachs or acting coaches might ant their actors or actrecess work on their facial expressions. When someone acts you can sometimes feel how they're feeling, and so if they aren't aren't doing a good job at acting then you wouldn't know hot to feel. People will see how your emotions are and will feel a certain way because of how your expressions are or how your posture is. Making facial expressions shows a lot on how someone is feeling. Experiments can show many different things.

12

6ae483f

The authour suggests that studying Venus is a worth pursit despite the dangers it presents. Even though its dangeruse the author still thinks its a good idea to go and study Venus. You can tell the author belives this to be ok evon though its dangerous when he said," Human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intemidating eneavors." This means that he knows its dangruse but everyone is curuose about what they will find, even if its dangerous he thinks its worth it. The opertunity to find signs of life or rare metals it would prove tempting for some even if it was dangrouse. If you continue to read the passage he goes on to talk about how Venus is inhospitable. He then says he still wants to study it by saying, "Astronomers are facinated by Venus beause it may well once have been the most earth like." This means they are trying to see if Venus had life just as earth dose now. In conclusion the author thinks the pros of going to Venus out way the cons. Honestly I think he is right my self we could discover so much if only we knew what secrets Venus holds.

23

ecb977a

Twenty five years ago NASA’s Viking 1 spacecraft was circling Mars, taking photos of possible landing sites for its companion vessel Viking 2. While looking over a region of Mars called Cydonia, controllers of Viking one at the Jet Propulsion Lab were stunned to see what looked like a giant head almost two miles long from top to bottom. They quickly came to a conclusion that it was just another Martian mesa, commom in Cydonia. Although there were some skeptics. The “Face on Mars” became an icon. It was talked about on radio shows, it was written about in books and magazines even placed in grocery store checkout lines. Some belived that the face was proof of ancient civilizations. Although few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact. Global Surveyor (MGS) arrived at the Red Planet in Sept. 1997, eighteen long years after the Viking missions ended. Jim Garvin, a cheif scientist for NASA said “We photographed the Face as soon as we could get a good shot at it.” Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team photographed the face ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, The photograph uncovering a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. But some were not satisfied. The Face on Mars can be found at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April ’98—a cloudy time of year on Mars. The camera on board MGS had to look through clouds to see the Face. Maybe, said some skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze. Mission controllers decided to look again. “It’s not easy to target Cydonia,” said Garvin “In fact, it’s hard work.” Mars Global Surveyor is a mapping spacecraft that normally looks straight down and scans the planet like a fax machine in narrow 2.5 km-wide strips. In all scientist uncovered that the mysterious "Face" on Mars wasn't a face at all, just a regular Martian mesa. Using high definition cameras and updating old pictures. it wasn't the end of a mystery or a stunting of imagination, it was the beging of a new thirst for deep space exploration.

34

fb0a7af

Here is how Facial Action Coding is very valuable for the scuccess of our class rooms. The use of this technology can help teachers ferther understand how there students are feeling and there for make the nessary adjustments to help student success go up. In the story "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author states that we can now we can actually calculate emotion just with math,there are six basic emotions that the computer can read happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness all the computer has to do is associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles and it can begin to calculate the emotions your feeling. The technologhy will also be able to tell when a student is pretending to be happy there for the teacher will be able to help that student feel better and help in a different way from the happier students. The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D a model of a face, all 44mmuscles must move in the right way for it to work but once it does the system will work nicely. The only down side is that the computers you have at home can't handle the complex agorithms used to decode their own and the mona lisa's smile. But once they return to school the will receve the same help that they obtained before. In conclusion how will Facial Action Coding System be a good addtion to our schools? The software will finally alwolled us to finally know how our students will feel. It states in the text that the mona lisa is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and finally 2 percent angry, this system was able to read this just from a painting and it will be able to do a lot more in the futre.

23

4cd774a

The "Face of Mars" isn't really a face. It only looks like one. It's because of the land and the shadows it gets, from different angles. It may look more like a face at other angles, and it also maybe just looks like a big blob of land. So it's not a face. Also if anyone was able to create that it'd be impossible because no human being could live there. There's no oxygen there. So it'd be impossible if someone created that, there on the planet Mars. Yes, when they did first discover the "Face on Mars" everyone thought it was a face on Mars, but over the years it became a whole lot easier to see. At first the photo taken in 1976, was a very blurry picture, not high quality on that first one. Then the second one, taken in 1998, it sort of still looked like a face, but not as much as the first photo. Then the last one taken in 2001, you could see and tell that it wasn't a face. It was just the way you would look at it. At different angles. So it is really all your say, not mine. It only looks like a face because of the shadows and the landform. The huge rock formation has given everyone the illusion of it having eyes, nose and a mouth. When none of that stuff is really there, in the first place It just looks like it's there, but in reality it's not. Nothing is there except for rock formations and a whole bunch of different landforms. There's also one weird and unusual shadow that made the rock formation look something like an Egyptain Pharaoh. It just all depends on if you still think it looks like a face. It's all your opinion, not mine. Ihave no say in what you think it looks like. We don't see everything in the same way, no one does. So if you think it looks a face still then to you it's a face. But to me it's just some landform that looked a lot like a face when the first photo that was taken in 1976, it looked a lot like a face. But then over the years we took more pictures an dit turns out just to be some landforms and shadows.

23

05b0858

Venus is the second plannet closest planet closest to the sun and has the tempature of 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents because of the challanges and resources that may occur. NASA has shown from this study that nobody has touched this planet because of their preventions. Venus is a worthy pursuit of studying despite the danger it presents from the challenges that occur. From knowing the risks of people not surviving to be able to stay on a planet for more than a few hours, it makes it more of a challenge to at least touch venus. Although the text states, "NASA’s possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." This shows that this is the safest spot to be close enought to venus. The text also states, "The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable..." From the text, it has shown that nobody has the problem of going to venus for a study, just as the problem of coming back survived and healthy. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit by seeing what people are capable of managing to do. From studying Venus that can pursuit many resouces that are and could be presented in this project. NASA sees this as a processing challenge by having resources that could be processed. For an example, the text states "systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces.". By having a device that could help the danger and requirements, could solve the solution of the pressure in the atmosphere. If NASA is able to get to the planet, there will be many sources to be brought back for examination to study. For an example,"The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters.", the text has shown their are many types of feauture to be explored. The text also states,"More importantly, researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance.", from this iy shows that if the resoucres come reasonable to use, it could increase the possibility. From the study of venus it has shown knowing how it can increase the production of each challenge and resouce. It is possible to be completed with correct amount of studying . Studying impacts on how much you know of the project to process through all of the steps. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presnts by the challenges and resources being presented.

34

f08cc3e

Cars in our society has been a benefical invention that we've had. Now that we are living in the 21st century people are worried about the negative effects that cars are contributting to. If we limit the use of cars it takes away stress from drivers, it reduces air pollution, and avoids many traffic jams we have on daily basis. Although, life can be hard without cars their are several other ways to get around without harming our enviornment. One option we should take into consideration is walking. A little excersise doesn't harm anyone so why is it that since we have cars no one really walks anymore. If the human population in 1812 walked so can we. To add on, stress in one of the main things you get while driving. You're in constant fear of people crashing into you,running a red light,running out of gas in the middle of the highway/street. Thw whole concept of driving is stressful enough for me and I don't even drive yet. If we limit the use of cars in our community it reduces lot of unecassary stress. The first source talks about a German residency where cars aren't permitted and if you own a car you can choose to buy a space for it which costs $40,000. Vauban (German residency) is home to 5,500 residents and only a few on them own car. "In this approach, stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway." The thought of having one main street where everyone can access all they need is a genius idea becuase it basically forces people to walk and it reduces the use of cars which lowers stress. We shouldn't stress about cars becuase owning a car isn't a right, it's a privelage. "On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31)." Source number two states that the reason why this did this Paris was because of intense smog.              

23

e34416f

Facial Action Coding System allows computers to identify human emotions. Websites could use this technology to keep people interested in ads. Teachers could use this technology to identify the emotions of students in the class. I believe that the use of this new technology, on students, would be an invasion of privacy. Most students do not want their emotions to be known, especially by a teacher or their classmates. Emotions are meant to be something that is willingly shared by a person, not taken from them by a software. If a teacher believes that a kid is confused or bored, then they should ask the student not a computer. Often an emotion that is felt is not shown on the outside. A person might look completely uninterested, when in reality they just naturally look bored. The Facial movements do not tell every emotion as it truely is. Some emotions are easily confused while others are an odd combination. A person cannot always show their true emotions plain as day. There are disorders that give people permanant smiles or frowns. Some people naturally look angry or sad. If all emotions were clearly stated by facial movements, then there would be less confusion in the world. Dr. Huang said that a computer could change a lesson based on the emotions that a student is "expressng." (6) If a student appears confused during a lesson, modifying it for that one student is a terrible idea. Classes are made up of more than just one student. If a lesson is changed because one kid is looking confused, then a few more kids might not understand anymore. It is impractical to try and keep every child interested in a class. If a computer kept changing the lesson because one kid was bored, then the entire class would never learn anything. Logically, computers that are used to detect emotions in a class and change lessons beased on that are impractical, illogical, and a hinderance to learning. Students can ask a teacher to explain a lesson in a different way, but a teacher will not change an entire lesson based on one student's needs. There are many other resources that schools can use to help kids excell, but invading a child's privacy by analyzing their emotions is not the correct way to go about it.

34

07f4106

Facial Action Coding System allows computers around humans to read their emotion based by the look on their face. Dr. Huang tells that this device can tell your emotion because of the muscles in your face and how they are either tightened or relaxed. FACS should be used on students so teachers can help them talk it out, help them understand the material that is being teached and help them learn the emotion of people around them. Using FACS on students should be allowed. If using FACS in a classroom full of teenagers, a teacher will just see a room filled with hormonal teens. They will just ignore it and think they are just moody. Or a teacher could see how upset a student is and ask if they are okay. This computer could become useful in helping students when they are upset or angry. If could allow the teacher to talk to them and check up on them every once in a while. FACS can detect the six basic emotions such as surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. The computer will detect these emotions through the movement of the muscles. Teachers can use FACS to help students understand the subject more clearly. Learning and understanding school is very important to young students, they need the knowledge to go and be successful in the future. Teachers want to know if a student is getting confused while listening to a lecture. It is important for teachers to know how to help their students. This computer will help out with the use of studying and scaning how their facial muscles are being moved or how their eyebrows are being lifted. Knowing how someone around another could help out a lot. If this FACS could really detect human emotions just from the expression on the face and movement of the muscles then it could help a human understand how the person next to them is feeling. Zygomatic major are the muscles that begin in your cheek bones, they life the corners of your mouth. That muscle can determined if someone is giving a forced smile or genuine smile. This could help a person know when another is upset and needs space or if another is in need of comforting. It could also help to see if someone is angry and needs time to cool down. FACS is able to help people talk out the emotion they are feeling, help them understand material that is being taught to them and help them learn the emotion of people around them. FACS will be able to conclude a feeling of a person and will possibly be able to help someone. Knowing how someone is feeling is very important because then people will know how to appoarch them and how to talk to them. FACS would be very successful in helping others out and it could be used to know a person feels.

34

9245d63

I say we keep the Electoral College. For one we are not put with that pressure of a single vote from us, the people instead its like a claim to the candidate. Though some candidates in some states may seem hopeless to the people of the states though that barley happens due having a trans-regional appeal. Even if it is a bit "outdated" we have been using it for years and it hasn't had much flaws. The close vote in 2012 was won because of the votes in Florida due to its population thanks to the Electoral College. Also some people may not understand the real intents of a president, example if a potental candadate, if in their campaign the went to sent troops to war but try to cover it up by saying the area they are sending the troops in caused something or threatened the country the  then the people would side with the candidate. It balances  out large states from small states not causing much of a arguement so you have equality. Also it depends on the state candidate who should be listen to the people of the state to help their vote. Also some people can be bias to a potental candidate and vote for him instead but with the state candidate that can't really happen. Even if the state candidate is hopeless they can still try to the the popular vote for that candidate their voting for. With those small votes they could make that candidate win. If states pay attention to candidate ads they could vote for the candidate they actually think should win for political reasons. For area the candidate know he will win he has focus on just those states so he points them out making the other states feel like that candidate doesn't care for them. Say we remove the Electoral College then people in more populated area can vote for the candidate the wish to win and they can outnumber the candidate by a whole lot. Bottom line we need to keep the electral college.

12

2eddc0b

The Seagoing Coyboys were having some of the best times of their life! Luke is a Seagoing Cowboy. Doing this job is so much fun! Being a Seagoing Cowboy is exciting because of the unique places, helping other people in need, and it keeps you very busy during the trip. The first reason you should be a Seagoing Cowboy is because of the unique places you go. The possible places are Greece, Crete, Panama, and Italy. You could see the acropolis in Greece. Taking a gondola ride in Venice, Italy would be magnificent too! You could see the famous Panama Canal or an excavated castle in Crete. Thre are so many different opportunities! You could sign up for this program right now! A second reason you should be a Seagoing Cowboy is because you could help other people in need. Luke didn't even know of all the people of other countries. That awareness stayed with him for a long time. His family has hosted a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years. Luke helped the countries in ruins that were left after World War II. He helped take care of the animals such as horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. A third reason you should be a Seagoing Cowboy is because it keeps you extremely busy. You will be as busy as a bee! As I said, you take care of the animals they take overseas. The animals have to be fed, given water, and have their stalls cleaned. Bales of hay and bags of oats had to be pulled from the lower holds of the ship. Luke was also a night watchman once. He had to check on the animals every hour. He had to make an hourly report as well. You don't work the entire time either. You have time to play games and do sports as well. Some people may say you should not be a Seagoing Cowboy. They may say it takes too much time or it does not do you good. I would counter this statement because this job teaches people responsibilty of taking care of animals. Being overseas does take a while, but it does teach people patience. There is also time to sightsee and play games. These reasons show being a Seagoing Cowboy is not a waste of time. After reading this article, I learned a bunch about Seagoing Cowboys. I still don't think this job is a waste of time. This job will teach you many things. Afterwards, people will be as happy as a puppy wagging its tail! All of these reasons lead me to believe that more people should join this program.

34

16ed2eb

There are many resons that people should do that. #1 is that it it would be some much fun to go explor places that you havent been befor, and go see all the unic culters that many people dont ever get to see in their life. #2 is that you could get closer with some of yor friends and family if they go with you, or invite you to go with them. Reson #3 is that you could meet new people learn other languiges too. Also you cold become part of a family they could take you in and youk cold have another really close friend from some were far far away from were you live. In the story Luke said"It would a chance of a life time." An I think it would be a chance of a life time. In my opinone I would do it. I would love to go on a trip tio eventure around the world. I love learning new cultres and to see what what it could help me with in my life. Also that it would be cool to do a report on all the places that you whent to in the proses. If I were him or any one els that got the opertunity I would say yes to doing it. In my family its important to learn and get youst to doing thatbecause my famoly dose alot of edventering. We go to the D.R, Hawaii Colorado, and alot more places too. I think that any kid that gets invited should that, because what they learn stiks to them and it stays with them for a long time and if they dont then they missed a big opertoonity to do that. I went to the DR for the first time when is like 5 years old and I learnd a lot of spanish when i as there. I also made a lot new friend people my age people that older younger than me too. An we bonded rely whell and i didnt know how to speek a word of spanish!!! I had a translator that helped me know what they were saying tio me and for them to tell the kids what i was saying too. i leand a lot of spanish when i wa there and i still know to say a lot of things in spanish too. I still kow my beat friens name in the D.R. We taught eachother how t say the alfabet in English and Spanish. Just saying I had the best time of my life and I stayed in the same place the hole time and I still lernd a lot in one day. And the hole time I was there I was so happy till it came to the part when I had to say by to all my new good friend that I made there. Its hard to leave but then you get to all the other places and meet other people there too. People that want to explor should do this in order to see what ist like and if thay want to do this for the a long time or not. Just one time at a different place then were you live is awesome because you never want to leave. You could also go see uther animal sthat you have never seen befor in a zoo or that you have never herd of too. I love to see knew thing even if I have heard of it,or not, or seen it, or not it is still really cool to experiance that. An I think kids, aldolts, teens, or eve the elderl would stil love to see that or experiance that time with the family. And that is my reso to do tha or a least tr yit out for the first time. It could only come once in a lfe time dont let it go to wast, because if you did than you made the biggest mustake of your life.

01

fdfce42

In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author talks about how Venus is the secound planet from the Sun, and also often reffered as Earths twin. In the article it states, Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and also the closest in distants too"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus). People have sent nonman spacecrafts to Venus for good reasons because 97% of Venus atmosphere is blankets of carbon dioxide. In the article the author states "Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus atmoshere"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus). On the land of Venus temperatures average 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmosperic pressure is 90 times greater than what we have on our planet.The pressure would crush everything on our planet. In the article the author states "Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments lie erupting volcanoes. powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land and on its surface" (The Challenge of Exploring Venus). Therefore it will make things alot harder fo scientist to fully understand Venus, however NASA has a plan to send people on a ship to orbet around Venus to get a better understanding of Venus, however doing it with a ship dosent allow the scientist to have a full insight of the ground because the light cant break through the dense atmosphere, therefore they wont be able to do all of the test to see if there is some possible way for us to live on Venus. In the article it states " Many researchers are working on innovaitions that would allow our machines to last long enough to contibute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus). So scientist our still trying to fiqure things out today. So the only thing they can do is to keep striving to meet the challenges presented by Venus has, and not only because of the insight to be gained on Venus itself, but by human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally threatning courses.

12

03705ca

To my fellow citizens all across the world I think there are a lot of advantages that come with the limited car usage. One thing is that it could save the environment from the polution of gas. Also it could save people a whole lot of money if they didn't have a car. Lastly and final statement why limited car usage is advantage is that they use the money from the car to buy homes. For starters, their are a lot of things that come with buying a car but a lot of people dont no is that every time they start up there car their actually hurting the evironment because of the gas. Here is an example from source 2."After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city". After reading that it seems to me that the pollution of the gas is becoming to be a problem all around the world and thats why we need to put a stop to it by just banning it for country to country and then eventually become a car free world. Another example I found from source 2. "[The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world". I read that and i was like wow! I wonder why that might be well if they banned the car usage they might bring do there pollution or congestion in the city. Thats why the pollution from the gas is so bad it could actually harm or maybe possibly kill them if they breathe in that pollution on a consistant basis. Secondly, people make pretty big sacrifices in life but one I found most interesting was that Germany residents were selling there cars to buy homes for them to live in. This strikes my eye in very many ways is that they are saving an expense they don't need and also saving the environment also. For example, in source 1 it said "70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars and 57 percent sold a car to move here". I find that quite interesting why a family like that would just give up transportation and then I thought well they save a ton of money and also they get to move to maybe a better living environment just by limiting the car usage. People who live in Levittown, New York are good example of limited car usage because a lot of them work in the city and a lot of times driving into the city is not a very good thing to do because of the traffic. So what do they do? They don't drive a car but only to the train station were they ride the train to and from the city saving money in gas and its easier to do it that way. Thirdly, citizens use limited car usage to save money in life because lets all face it the world we live in is tough money is hard to come by and people have car payments they have to pay every month and sometimes they cant make that payment cause they have other bills they have to pay so what do they do. They sell they car and that gives them extra money a month to pay for bills a such forth. Another thing they save from selling there car is that they don't have to pay for gas either so your probably saving some where around 200 hundred dollars in cash or credit in one month which is good. Thats another reason why selling your car is an advantage of limited car usage. In conclusion, their are a lot of ways where citizens of the world can use limiting there car usage as an advantage. Where it might be saving the environment or selling your vehicle to buy a home or even maybe just to save money in everyday life like some citizens do in Levittown, New York. These were some of my opinions on advantages of limiting car usage in everyday life.      

34

7b69af5

Dear Senator, The reason for writing this letter is because in a recent topic brought up to the nation the Electoral College was being revised to see new changes in the way we choose our president. The Electoral college is a fundamental way on how we control the voting process for our president. In an article "What is the Electoral College" by the Office of the Federal Register it had an interesting statement that stood out. In the text it said " The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election by a vote in Congress and election of the President by popular vote...". This is telling us that the Electoral College that was established many years ago is the same thing that people are voting for now, because people today are fighting for voting by popular vote but the current Electoral College is the same thing. The current Electoral College is working fine, this is one of the reasons it shouldn't change but there are more reasons as to why it shouldn't change. The current Electoral College has worked greatly to our nation even though people don't see it that way but it has. Another reason that the Electoral College should stay the same is because many people want to abolish the Electoral College even though its helped them choose a president that is either fighting for the nation itself or fighting for the people. The reason that people want o abolish the Electoral college is in an article "The Indefensible Electoral College: why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer. In the article it states " It's official: The electoral college is unfair... Abolsih the electoral college!". This is telling us that some of the people in the nation want to abolish the Electoral College because they want their own system of electing a president. The Electoral College has been named man things and has been tried to change but it can't because that is the only way people as a nation know how to choose a president. In the article "The Indefensible Electoral College: why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer it says " ...The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. and the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best..". This shows us that even the people that are fighting agaist the Electoral College are making random statements that either go for it or against it because they don't know what they are fighting to achieve. The Electoral College is the same thing people are trying to change because in the article "What is the Electoral College" by the Office of the Federal Register it states " The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect a president...". This textual evidence shows that the Constitution was actually compromising what the people are fighting for and what is already used. This also tells us that the current Electoral College is what is needed and shouldn't be changed. In Conclusion, the Electoral College shouldn't be abolished or changed to popular vote elects the president because the current system is working fine and the reason people are fighting agaisnt it is because they might not know what they are fighting to change or maybe they think that the Electoral College is changing the vote so that they government has their chosen president rather than the peoples president. All those ideas are things that people think when their favored senator, mayor, or President loses their chance. The people just need to realize that the current Electoral college was made by the fathers of this country in order to compromise what they are fighting for and what is already used. These are the reason why the Electoral College should not be changed.  

23

8618ef2

What is my position on a driverless car? I believe with enough improvments and optimization it could be a great substitute for real drivers and offers some great advantages with some disadvantages as well. As they currently are however I don't believe they can be substituted fully instead of a real driver. However with enough improvment and bug fixes they certainly could be. Why couldn't they be used fully now? They aren't really as reliable as they need to be so they can't be used instead of real person. Driverless cars don't seem to have the ability to deal with unknown stimulus such as an accident on the road, therfore it is ill equip to make an apropriate decision to avoid these situations. And it appears the they can't handle speeds that you would find on the highway. Driverless cars aren't perfect but they do have some advantages along with the disadvantages. First of all they have bulit in GBS so they wouldn't get completely lost like a human can. If there tech is advance enough they could avoid danger more effectively since a computer can react faster than human. There would be a decrease in mortality rate on the road because there wouldn't be as much danger paying attention somewhere else like being on you phone since you aren't the one driving. The amount of money you'd spend on gas would decrease since it would always drive the most cost saving speed.( while staying in bounds of the speed limit of course) You could be more productive with your days since you would be spending less time driving the car. But currently they aren't advanced enough to take over driving fully from a person. The GBS tachnology that we currently have is faulty and will often make mistakes. The Cars sensors could malfunction causing it to speed up or slow down to rapidly causing a accident. They Currently can't make the apropriate decisons to avoid a accident or navigate around a roadblock. Also it can't really go speeds that you would find on a highway safely. Now here are some of my suggestions to where they could get to the point where they are useable. There would need to be a large amount of servers set up to help the cars to make all the correct calculations. The censors on the cars would need a serious improvement so that they would be able to take acquire the correct data from the envronment. They would also need a better built in computers to process and interpret all the data. All of this development would increase the number of available jobs around the world helping out the economy. The driverless car isn't a reality but with enough effort it sure could be. Of course i'm no expert so take these suggestions at face value. So in conclusion no they shouldn't currently be developed. They have a lot of problems that need to be addressed before hand. However in a few years they certainly could be. Technology needs to catch up with the concept because it currently isn't as reliable as they need to be. People also need to change they're perspective on them if they are going to go anywhere. They have a lot of potential and I would love to see them live up to it one day. What about you?

34

b701593

I agree that driverless cars are coming. I agree because people are becoming lazy and try to find every short-cut they can. another reason is it makes driving more entertaining. And last a person can still controll the car if he or she wishes. Thats why I believe that driverless car are coming. The first reason why i believe that driverless cars are coming is because people are getting lazy. People are gitting lazy by instead of walking they use hoverboards. Since people are getting lazy the next step is to have someone drive their car for them. People would buy this type of car so they would not have to put there feet on the pedal all day. Thats how I think people would buy this type of car. Another reason is that this car would be more entertaining. It would be more entertaining beacause someone who is driving could use their phone because the car would drive it's self. The car could have a tv that someone can watch but when it their turn to drive it turns off. The driiver wouldnt have to be concerned about crashing when looking away because it could drive its self. Thats how this car would be entertaining. Last the driver could still control the car if he or she wishes. The car notifys the diver when the road area requires human skill. This means the driver must remain alert and ready to take over when the situation requires. The GM has developed driver seats that vibrate when there is danger of backing into an object. Thats how who ever owns the car could still control it if he or she wishes. I believe that driverless cars are coming. I do because of all of th information I said like that people are getting lazy. Also it would be more entertaining. And last a person could still control it if he or she whishes. That is why I believe driverless cars are coming

23

45a316a

According to a Gallup poll taken shortly after Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency, over 60 percent of voters prefer a direct election over the electoral college. Electors could always defy the will of the people. Candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning. The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The abolishment of the electoral college will make choosing a president less difficult and allow the people to make their own choice. In the article, In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President, written by Richard A. Posner, the Electoral College is widely regarded as belonging to the past and not being able to fit the present. In 2000, when Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes, Bush took the presidency, despite popular demand. Voters can't always control who their electors vote for. They sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate. With a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state. According to The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong, written by Bradford Plumer, with the even number of total votes of electors there is a chance there can be a tie between the number of electors that chose each president, in that case the House of Representatives would vote on the president. This would make the state of Wyoming with a single representive representing 500,000 voters have as much say as the 55 representatives in California who represent 35 million voters. The House's selection can hardly be expected to reflect what the people want. On the off-chance that the electors you voted for won the statewide election, they would go to Congress and who they elect would get the electoral votes. Anyone not holding public office can be an elector. The electors get choosen depending on the state they represent. The whole election process would be easier if the voters were able to directly state who they want to elect.      

23

b61aeaf

The Face of Mars has proven to be one of NASA's most mystifying cases to ever be solved. Twenty five years ago, as NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling Mars, it snapped a photo of a startling image resembling a human face. After releasing the image to the public, many people became fascinated in the "face". This rolled the ball for many people to believe there was an ancient civilization on Mars. However, modern technology and expertise of numerous scientists have discovered the face is merely a natural landform. The use of more efficient cameras have diminished any hopes of alien life on Mars. NASA's Mars Exploration Program has already identified the area on which the face is found as Cydonia. When the face was first seen in the Jet Propulsion Lab, scientists figured it was a Martian mesa, which were common enough in Cydonia. Although it was abnormally figured in the shape of a human face, scientists already knew mesa's were prominent in the area of Cydonia. Also, modern technology, such as a Mars Global surveyor camera, has revealed the fact that the Face on Mars is nothing but a natural landform. The camera's absolute maximum resoultion picture ensures that no "alien markings" were hidden by haze, as some skeptics argued. In the 2001 image, each pixel spans 1.56 meters, whereas pixels in the 1976 image spanned 43 meters. Therefore, the better camera quality ensures the truth behind the Face on Mars: a natural landform. Some people argue that, due to the cloudiness on the planet, alien life could have been hidden by haze. However, NASA sent the Mars Global Surveyor on "a cloudless summer day in Cydonia" and captured another photo. Garvin explained "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size." Garvin knew if there were any pyramids or shacks, the camera would have been able to capture it and he would have been able to see it. Thus, there is no chance haze could have hidden the aliens. People also argued that the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars- evidence NASA would rather hide. This is not the case. Authors thought this would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars. Therefore, the belief of life on Mars is simply just for the public. It has been in Hollywood films, books, magazines, and radio talk shows. The Face on Mars was used to engage the public, not neccessariy to inform. Proven from better camera quality and scientific knowledge, people can know believe the Face on Mars is just a natural landform. If any civilization was there, the Mars Global Surveyor would have been able to seen it. Also, mesa's are common in the Cydonia area, where the face was found. In conclusion, better technology from 1976 proves the Face on Mars is a landfrom, and there is no chance any life on Mars exists based on the face.

45

ad31471

The face on Mars was not created by aliens. You may think this because it was on Mars, and some may think this was a sign of life on the planet. But, this is not true. It was not created by aliens, but by shadows. It was formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. As I said, this was just an illusion. This happend 25 years ago, and people are still fussing about how this was created by aliens. This is impossible because there is no life on Mars. This "face" is just a natural landform. Many years ago scientists thought it was a sign of life too, but this was short lived. Soon after they thought this, they figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, where the spacecraft was circling when they found the face. This Martain mesa was just like the others, except it had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Soon after the scientists saw this unusual Martian mesa, they released it to the press so everyone could see. The "Face on Mars" has since become a pop icon. It has starred in movies, magazines, radio talk shows, and as the passage says "Haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years". This is a perfect example of why you shouldn't trust what you see on movies, online, or read in magazines. In the passage it says,"Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars, evidence that NASA would rather hid, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an acient civilization on Mars." If you pay attention to the last sentence, it says,"Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an acient civilization on Mars", the key word in this is "wish". This is just more proof that this was just a natural landform. In conclusion, the Face on Mars was not created by aliens. It was just another Martian mesa that had unusual shadows that looked like a face. This story and picture was released to the press, and people belived that it was created by aliens, and that it was a sign of life on Mars, but that is not true. This is why you should not believe movies, radio talk shows, and what you read in magazines. This shows that the "Face on Mars" was not created by aliens as a sign of life, but a shadow.

34

da5a8fd

I know you might think that the face on Mars was created by aliens, but here at NASA we have been doing reasearch for many years to find any signs of life on other plants, and so far we have nothing. The face on Mars might look like it was created by aliens, but our reasearch shows that it is just shadows. Also because we have been doing reaserch for so long all of our studies show that there is no possible way that any creature would be able to survive on any other planet in our solar system other then Earth. Also as it said in our reserch it is just a rock formation that happened because of soemthing like a landslide. When all of us here at Nasa first saw the image we knew we had to study it! When we beagan our studies we sent a space craft up to take pictures. When we recived those pictures we noticed that it looked like it was a shadow of the way we were taking the picture or maybe the way that rocks were laying. We were all still curious on how the rocks got there so we kept studying! At NASA there is always reaserch of something going on! When we first started reaserch one of our main goals was to figure out if there is any possible way that people could live on any other planet then Earth. So far we have concluded that there is no possible way that anyone could survive on any other planent, because there is no suply of food or water. So with our prior knoladge of that we knew that there were no aliens on any planets! Even though we knew all these things we still wanted to know more so we continued our reasearch. While contuning our reaserch we found out that it was highliy possible that there was something like a landslide on Mars. With our knoladge of landslides we knew that they can sometimes form things like rock scopluters that look like things they are something they are not. So with all of our reaserch we all came to a conclusion. All of us at NASA were very sure with our conclusion of this was not created by aliens that it was just something as simple as a land slide and shadows. Throughout our reasearch we found out that the reason the rocks look like a face is shadows, and that the rocks got there from something like a landslide. These are the reasons us at NASA belive that the face on Mars was not created by aliens but simply rocks and a shadow.

23

a99524d

The end of car culture around the world. Cities around the world are banning driving for weather conditions or for experimental purposes. In German suburb driving has been forbidden as well as street parking, driveways and home garages. People have been selling their cars just to move to Vauban, Germany. The limiting of car usage has been a great factor to help the enviroment, and to excersize. The end of car culture is coming to an end because many people have been leaving their cars at home and taking the bus or walkin to work. People are driving less, and the youth have are not excited to be driving. Sociologists believe the decrease amount of driving is due to the fact that we are able to connect with our friends over the internet and no longer need to see each other in person. In many cities around the world are banning driving because of enviromental purposes. In Colombia, there is a car-free day where cars are being banned with only taxis and busses permited. The goal is to promote altenative transportation and reduce smog. In Paris driving was banned due to the amount of smog. They blamed the smog on diesel because 67 percent of the cars use diesel. Although cars were banned in Paris, congestion decreased about 60 percent in the capital of France, after the five-days of smog. The limiting of car usage can benefit everyone. This is because around the world everyone drives, nobody thinks twice about it. Driving has been a huge part of the America can life, but it seems it is coming to an end people are relying more on walking and riding a bicycle or taking the bus. Car limiting benefits everyone because it will help people stay healthy and hike or bike to point A to point B. People are becoming more enthusiastic about not driving. Parks and sports centers have bloomed throughout cities; uneven sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rudh-hour restrictions have cut traffic dramatically; and restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up. The end of car culture is upon us, people have been selling cars, countries have been banning driving, and cities are forbiding street parking, driveways and home garages. The amount of people driving has decreased dramatically since 2005, in the United States. People are taking the bus, hiking, biking to get from A to B. The limiting of cars can help improve your health and help improve the enviroment.

23

0fc2a56

Hello, there fellow citizens of all around what if i could tell you there could be less car accidents, less pollution, and a healthier life style that we can all live with right now! and all we had to do is let go of only one thing that one thing is your car it is a killing machine not just for people but also for our mother earth. Before you call me crazy and tell me that could never happen lets look at germany where people are trying to make a change in an upscale community where even soccer moms have given up there cars and 70 percent of the people there dont have cars and 57 percent sold there cars. now tell me do I sound crazy now besides people in that community were saying "when i had a car i was always tense. im much happier this way " which might sound shocking to you but i whould be happy too if our greenhouse gas and toxic in the air wasnt so high 12 percent of it comes  from cars and 50 percent in some car intensive areas in the usa. but all hope isnt done yet because the enviromental protection agency is promoting "car ruduced" communities. whick might save us from hurting the earth because a healthy planet makes happy people. Further more if you still dont believe that this could effect us look at paris, paris typically has more smog than anyother european capital they found that paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 brussels and 79.7 percent in london reuters found now thats a life i dont want to life amagine the advantages we could have if we could live and just be healthier. one of our advatages whould be clean air and less deaths  becuase the air we breath in can effect the way we think because if we take in bad were going to give out bad if we take in good we take out good. also parks and sports centers could be at a all time high now you wont have to nag your kid to leave the house he'll already be out before you say a word In bogota, columbia where the clouds are gray but the ambition is strong even though its not stop rain the people say "its a good opportunity to take stress away stress and lower air pollution" and i think there doing a great job with this because its there 3rd strait year that they have banned cars and there pollution level is at a all time low. you see what this is showing you is that we dont have to face these challenges and disivantages that all these countrys are facing we can learn now and prosper on and not have to start ove like these countrys. Last but not least  the end of the car culture  is near when miles driven in the united states is going down steadily the future of amaerica looks bright our peoples health seems better but all we need to do is one big leap and sacrfise to achieve a place where we dont have to be scared to leave our house and to not have to see your self in the news showing the damage your car did we can all live in a better place if we just try.

23

0aaf5f1

In this story the author is talking about how humas have not made it on the planet of Venis. At least that we know about. The article said that scientits think there may be life or have been life on the planet. With scientists thinking if there is something up there on the planet there is a good chance that they will be able to find out soon with all the technology we have today. With all the things we have today I think we will find something on venus. If we do then there is a fact that there is aliens that are alive, unless they are just like us but from another planet. And that planet is closer to the sun than earth. I think with all the things in the article we will find somthing or that there was something there on venus at some point. It could of been a trillion years ago or there is still life on it today we will just have to find out. Time is the only thing that we have on are side.

01

1bf0096

Well I think that the electoral college should stay because, its much easier then just picking a person to run the united states. The first reason is because, all you need to get is 270 votes just to win the whole thing. Also the winner take all deal is when the person with the most vote would take the others votes beacsue that person dont have all of the votes, so the person with the most votes would take all of the votes. This is from passage Dose the electoral college work? And the electoral college was founed by the founding fathers, so we know that this thing is really good to use. The things that are wrong with use the electoral college is that is the person gets their votes for thir state the might just win because, the more the people that live there more of the votes that they might get. Pluse that shoulldnt be right beacsue that person knows everyone that lives in the town and they might not know that the other person is way much better then the person that  they knew for many years. Also most people thing the electoral college is un fair beacsue it doesnt really give you the right things and the peple might be force to chose the wrong person beaucsue they knew that person for many years but the dont nothing about the other person.  

12

4e05e94

This technology of reading into students emotional expressions for the classroom can be beneficial because it gives a more in depth look into how a student is feeling during a specific lesson rather than them saying they understand the lesson when they do not. This new technology may make it easier for classrooms because some kids dont like to speak up when they dont understand something and that does not help the student or teacher. So this new technology will keep the teacher up to date on how there students or feeling about the lessons. Some students assume it is easier to just not say anything at all when they dont understand something. Students dont want to be a hassle for the teachers to have to go back and go over a lesson so they end up not saying anyhting on there confusion. Also students just do not want to be the only classmate to speak up. Dr. Huang says " A clasroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." This can help the teacher in order to realize what they can do to make the lesson more fun like helping the students engage more. Also this can just help the teacher know what they can go over in order to make the students understand certain lessons more. This technology can help more so with the teacher because it is there job to help students when they do not understand something and to make the classroom learning process easier. Dr. Huang predicts that "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This would really help teachers alot in the sense that they dont have to worry about if anybody is behind in there class because everyone will be at there own pace on different levels of the lesson. Using technology to read students emotional expressions during class will be very beneficial to the teacher and students. This will help the classroom flow smoother because the teacher will not have to worry about who is caught up and there understanding, if the computer can figure out where the student starts getting confused or bored. Then mabey eventually the computer will be able to modify the lesson for peoples learning pace and understandment.

34

256ce94

In the story "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves" is about a man named Luke. Luke first started out working two part-time jobs at a grocery store and at a bank. Then his friend Don invited Luke to go on a cattle boat ride to Europe, but Luke couldn't say no. Then the reason Luke started to work with the "Seagoing Cowboys" because he wanted to help the people with their cattles, horses, and mules. Also to help countries recover their food supples, animals, and more, 44 nations joined to help to form UNRRA. Luke also join to travel across the ocean and se new places too. Then Luke work hard to feed the cattle, horses, and mules twice or three times a day, Luke started to work hard by bring up bales of hay and bring bags of oats from the lower holds of the ship to feed the cattle, horses, and mules everyday, and cleaning the stalls for the aniamls to comfortable when the animals are on the ship. Then on one rainy night after Luke made his hour report to the captain. He slipped on the leader and landed on his backside, but he was stopped by a small strip of metal on the edge to keep him from flying overboard. Luke broke his ribs and could not work for a couple days to his engary. In conclusion Luke and other people had a hard life during the year that they had, but they still had a good life during the year with their families and friend that are there to support you no matter what happenes during those year they had together.Also you should always work hard to complete your goals in life like Luke did in the story. When Luke completed his goals he got the best out it and he was happy all his life and his dream came ture to be a "Seagoing Cowboy" because he worked hard with the cattle, horses, and mules by getting them to places the animals need to go.

23

aa51a19

Why should you join the Seagoing Cowboys program? There are many different reasons you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. Some of the reasons you should join I am about to tell you. The first you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is so you could help people over seas and in other countries. A boy named Luke Bomberger got to do all of the things that you could be able to do, by joining the Seagoing Cowboys program. The next reason you should join the program, is that you could get to see many unique places all over the world. A lot of people do not get to see some of the things that you could be able to see during the Seagoing Cowboys program. After the animals are unloaded and you have some free time, you could so site seeing and do all of it for free! Luke Bomberger got to do this while visiting many different countries for free. Now that is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Another reason you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is that you could travel all over the world for free! That is a once in a lifetime opportunity. You don't get to travel to places for free very often. Luke Bomberger had the chance to go to many different countries and see many different things in those countries. The fourth reason you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program; is that when you are in the different countries and you have freetime over in those places, is that you can meet people and learn their about cutures. Luke got to go see and meet new people during his free time while people were still unloading the animals, and probably learned new things about those peoples cultures too. One of the other reason that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is that you can learn a lot of survival skills on the ships that you are on. If you ever are a capatin of a ship in the Seagoing Cowboys program or in any program, is that you will already know how to control a ship, keep your ship members in order, and know what to do when you are on that ship. Luke Bomberger got to learn a few things on how to contol a ship and what to do when a storm hits and you sail right through the storm. The sixth reason that you should join the program is that you could meet new people on the ship and get to know them. A lot of people do not have friends or just want to be more social. A way you could do that is by joining the program. After all of the animals are unloaded and you are heading back to your home to pick up more animals, you could play games with some of your ship members. Luke Bomberger got to meet new people and probably made some new friends while on some of those trips, even though he already had a friend that was going with him on the ships and things. The last reason you should join the Seagoing Cowboys is that you can spend a lot of time with animals. After you are finished with the program, and you need to find a job, you could open a new farm and already know how to take care of most of your animals. When Luke was on the ship he already knew how to take care of the animals but he probable go to learn new things on how to take care of them. Those are the reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. You get to help people, see unique places, you could travel all ofver the world, you get to learn about peoples cultures, you can learn a alot of survival skills, you can meet new people on the ship and make friends, and you get to learn a lot about animals and how to take care of them. Those are some of the many reasons you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program.

34

d9c8d70

The article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" talks about new software created by Thomas Huag, who studies Advanced Science at the University of Amsterdam along side his colleague Dr. Huang. They are both experts at coming up with better ways for humans and computers to communicate. That is excatly what this new invention is about. The invention they created is used to help recognize not only humans emotions but paintings' emotions as well. Leonardo da Vinci's famous painting the "Mona Lisa" is the subject of this particular experiment. Both scientists were succesful in finding out what were her actual feelings behind her smile. This invention would also be valuable for students in a classroom. The author writes in the six paragraph "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored". The author continues to elaborate and says that then the lesson would be modified. Modifying the lesson can mean that the teacher changes their teaching plan to fit the students understanding. Having this new innovation will make students smarter and get higher test grades, because they will be learning at their own pace and level, thus helping them understand the work better. This invention could also be essential for everyday human interactions as well since most of us communicate through a nonverbal launguage, this inventions would help us humans eachother better. Better communication leads to a lot of positivity in the world such as, less wars because we would be getting along better and understandandng eachother better. Overall this new invention would be very essential to use in a classroom for many reasons. It helps students understand the lesson more. Understanding is key for better test grades.

23

bff3d0f

I am in favor of changing the process in which America votes for its president;currently the when you cast your vote you are acctually voting for your candidate's electors whos votes do not become valid until [they] the electors are voted for by the [you] the people. A few problems with this process is expressed in an artical titled " The Indefensible Electoral Colledge" . With useing this process citizens sometimes do not have control over who their electors vote for, also voters may get confused and vote for the wrong candidate. I can understand why other people may think my claim is wrong, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and should also be entitled to their own vote aswell which is why instead of voteing for someone who will vote for our president [ we ] the people should directly vote for our candidates. In the same article" The Indfensible Electoral Colledge" It states "Back in 1960, segergationists in the louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replaceing the democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy". They did this as an attemp to take the popular vote from kennedy. This just shows how much freedom the electors have with your vote.        

12

cafe815

I feel that the idea was outgoing but you cant hold technology forever or always profound it as good yes I can be valuable and a pretty cool equmeint. But to say if this facial action coding can be relibel and give you accurte resluts is hard to believe. because just cause a machine tells you one thing doesnt mean its ture one can be happy and it can show the person mad. I just think for a fun a silly thing to try or do yes its valuable. But for something to speak on as if it acutlly works and did work and is giving accurte resluts no its not valuable. Like he said " she was 80 percent happy 9 percent disgusted 6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry. Yes you can have a lot of mixed emtions but to have one after another by a machine telling you come on now. it then again could be ture but I couldnt see that unless she presented that to us her self how she was really feeling at that moment and time.

12

c236426

The face on Mars is just a natural landform. When they took the picture it first looked like a face. Many people wondered if it was an alien made landform. It ended up being just a plain old landform on the red planet. Many people at first were freaked out or amazed of at the face on the red planet. The story and face appeared in movies, radio talk shows, the web, social media, and magazines. But after they sent out more ships to take pictures of the land form they got a better shot. The picture looked like a natural landform. In the article it says in there "...a natural landform." The scientist at NASA also figured out that it was cloudy on the red planet when they took the picture. "The face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was April '98- a cloudy time of year on the red planet."Some of the cloud or mist could of been right over the landform when the picture was taken. The Martian looks like a butte or mesa that is around the American West. "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivanlent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West."It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plains of Idaho," says Garvin." As you can tell from the evidence provided the Face on Mars is not really a face. It is just a landform on the red planet. It was cloudy the day they took it. They got better pictures and investigated it. The picture actully is quite close to the Middle Butte in the Snake RIver Plains of Idaho.

23

4a8528f

I disagree with the idea of driverless cars. They may seem like a good idea to some people but i say it is just more of a hazard. People now a days text and drive all the time and do not pay attention to yield signs or even the speed limit. Being in a car that you do not have to drive will give people the bad habit of not paying any attention to the road or things around them. With a car driving on its own they wont think it is neccessary. I say it is not a good idea at all to start such a bad habit. Although people may think it is a good idea to have driverless cars on the roads, I disagree. They say that the car can steer itself and ecelerate and slow down but what about all of the other things. There are multiple different things a car must do on the road that technology can not take over. Such as getting onto a highway or passing another car. How would a car know how to move left the back over right or if a car was coming from another direction. Technology may be upgrading but i think that it is not smart enough yet to control a car and get a passenger safely to their destination. Lastly, driving a car is a huge task and priveledge. Their are many different rules in driving such as no texting while driving and you must wear a seatbelt at all times. A driverless car is way too dangerous for teeneagers or even adults for that matter. I feel that being in a car that somehow drives itself will make people think that they have no responsibility anymore and they will think its okay to text and drive or not pay attention to their surroundings. Driverless cars were a good idea but i do not thing they would be safe for our generation.

23

604667f

Thats stupid because we would have saw them build it and it wasnt created by them its just shadows on a rock. we can prove that they did not make this because we would have saw it with the sattlites. So please belive me when i say that this rock was not created by alines at all! okay so i heard someone thought there was alines on mars. now im going to be honest from what weve seen there is no such thing yes there may be life on mars but small life. Nothing big enough to build something like this. The only life on mars may be bacteria Now please whoever is saying there are alines please stop. That will be all today proving another myth There is no such thing as aliens on mars. in the article it says that they were made by shadows bealive me when i say its true. If there was such thangs as aliens dont you think we would have found them by now? like honestly we have been looking for them fo years. and nothing trust me there is no alien life on mars. the face in the photo is even blury and doesnt look right this is becasue of sand and dust all over this. it causes an allusion to make u think that there is a face but in reality its not! the photo in 1976 people say its Not just a coquencedence there is a human face on mars. Picture this looking up in the clouds and seeing an animal its just clouds grouped together to make that image. Aleins didnt make that it happened naturally just like on mars. now that i have explained that there is no life on maars people will now know the truth. And hopefully i dont have to hear about this again because all people are worried about is are there aliens if there were aliens i think we would have known by now. And it says in paragraph 8 its just a haze please stop making excusaes for ther eto be alien life on mars!

12

dd0b4c0

In the article Luke was asked by his freind don to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldn't say no so when he said yes that would change his life. So then now he has been on nine trips since the first ever trip that he has taken. Luke was always busy tending the cattle during the day. He was having lots of fun even when he got knocked over the boat and broken his ribs. He was playing board games and everything like that to keep him busy while he was healing. The reason of Luke going on trips across the oceans because he likes it and he was born to do it. Also his freind asked Luke to come with him to keep him company during the trips. Luke was waiting for some thing to drastically change his life and he to his wish off the drastic change. Luke would stop going with don if Luke didn't like the motion sickness,or because there where a lot of storms,or he didn't like tending the cows during the long and tiring journey. If the possibility was that Luke didn't like the sea his freind would be like are you ok and or something like that. In conclusion Luke loves the sea and he wants to keep going out and adventuring the wild and the unknown. Luke couldn't say no because it was his freind don and he wanted to explore another island. Luke loves the same because he likes tending the cows and he likes his fellow crew mates that are with him on his journeys to the out and the open sea. Another reason that is because he wants to be in dangerous storms and worlpools. Luke want to take the risks in the dangerous sea.

01

1a28c7f

Dear, State Senator We should change the election process for the president of the United States to the 'election by popular vote' method. This process is a lot more equal and very easy for the people. The 'election by popular vote' method needs to become the newing presidential voting process for many reasons. When people vote today its not just the indivisual people voting its the indivisual states voting as a whole. Which in a way can cause confussion and unequality. The electoral college has many flaws inside its system, for instance ''under the electoral college system, voters do not vote for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president.'' But if you had the 'popular vote' method every single person that voted would have a personal vote that counted as 1. It is aggreable to sya that ''the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational.'' Even though the electoral college is widely regarded as an anachronism, a non democratic method of selecting a president. There are still at least two good reasons to keep it. One being that it ''restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states only ny populaton lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the Senate decreeed in the Constituton.'' And the other being that the Electoral college avoids the problem of elections where no candidate receives a mojority of the votes cast. In counterclaim of the good attributes of the electoral college voting system we could still state that the 'popular vote' method is still a much more equal, fair, accurate, and durable way of voting for the president of the United States.      

23