essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 720
20.5k
| score
class label 6
classes |
|---|---|---|
5cefbf4 | Would you like to join a program where you can explore and see different places? If so, you should join the " Seagoing Cowboys" program. You should join this program becasue you can go to new and different places, you can help save people, and it will make you into a better person.
To begin with, you can go to new and different places. Some people may argue that going new places doesnt really do anything its not very special. However, you can explore different places and it's really fun and adventurous. The
author states," Luke Bomberger crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and the Pacific Ocean twice to help people affecteed by the world." The author also states," But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for Luke Bomberger. It opened up the world to him. "i'm grateful for the opportunity," he says." This proves going different places is fun.
Additionally, you can help save people. Some people may argue that doing something for a person just wastes your time. However, doing something for someone you can probaly help save their lives. The author states," To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined togehter to form UNRRA. UNRRA hired "Seagoing Boys" to take care of the horses, young cows and mules that were shipped overseas." The author also states," By the time he was discharged in 1947, Luke had made nine trips- the most of any Seagoing Cowboy." This proves helping save people makes you a better person and makes you start doing helpful things.
Additionally, you can become a better person. Some people may argue that they want to stay the same person because being someone else is not the real you. However, becoming someone different can help others in a time they need you the most. The author states," Helping out on his aunt Katie's farm as a boy had prepared Luke for hard work, but not for the dangers at sea."
The author also states," And that awareness stayed with him, leading his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years." This proves that being a good and caring person is very awesome.
Joining the "Seagoing Cowboys" program would be awesome because you can go to new and different places, help save people, and you can become a better person. If you had the chance, would you join "Seagoing Cowboys"? | 34
|
0e495a2 | According to the Articles fellow citizens about the advantages of limiting car usage are going out for controll because the article indacties 70 percemt of Vauban's familes do not own cars, and 57 percant sold a car to move here. Also the Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in france , compared to a 5.3 percant average of the diesel engimes in the rest of western Europe , according to reuters. Still however indicates The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog and the Violators faced $25 fines. The Article also states As April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below th peak and equal to where the country was in januart 1995.
One Reason, Fellow citizens about the advantages of limiting car usage are going out of controll because in the article Ingerman Suburb,Life Goes On Without Cars states Automoblies are the linchpin of suburbs, where middle- class familes From chicago to shanghai tens to make their homes and that , experts say, is a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpies for the passenger car are responsibe for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in europe and up to 50 percent in sime car intensive areas in the united states. But in paris bans driving dur to smog takes about while exceptions were made for plug in cars,hybrids, and carrying three or more passengers.
Another Reason,fellow citizens about the advantages of limiting car usage are going out of control because it incates President obamas ambitions goals to curb the united staes greenhouse gas emissons, unveiled lastweek, will get a fortuitios assist from an incipient shoft in american behavior also recent studies suggest that americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each years goes by. the days without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in bogotoa in the mid 1990s.
However,Fellow citizens about the advantages of limiting car usage are going out of control because parks and spotys center also have bloomed throughout the city, uneven , pitted sidewalk have been replaced by broad, smoth sidewalks, rush hours restrictions have dramatically cut traffic and new testaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up and it counties that cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions.
Finally, these are the reason why fellow citizens should advantages of limting car usage are going out of control though out the untied states and different cities with the diesel fuel, car usages, and using there car all the times. | 12
|
f949f3c | An unusual face was spotted by Viking 1 in 1976. Looking at evidence that were provided, it shows that the "unusual face" found on Mars was just a mistake. Even though they had picture of the unusual face the first time they spotted, it was a really blurry one so it created illusions for people to make it look like there was actually a face on there. It was later proven by Mars Global Surveyor that it was just a natural landform on Mars using photography. Therefore, pictures don't lie which makes the "unusual face" just another natural landform.
In 1998, the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia, where the unusual face was found, to snap a picture of the unusual face which was ten times sharper than the Viking photos. Since the picture was pretty clear, it reveal what was actually there on Mar's surface. It proved that it was just a natural landform and that it wasn't any alien monument. People may say that since it's winter it was the cloudy time to of the year of for Mars so other things such as clouds could've had an effect on the picture but it doesn't change the fact that it's just a landform no matter how unsatified the people were.
In addition, NASA unveiled the image saying that it was just a huge rock formation. They noted that it resembles a human head because of the shadows. It was creating illusions for human eyes so they didn't see the actual object but instead they saw a face on Mars. Although, some scientists believed that the face was an alien artifact which was what got Mars Glbal Surveyor to even begin taking pictures of Mars to prove that it was just a natural landform. Overall, the face on Mars is just an illusion even though some people believe it's real.
However, people might think it's real. Looking at the evidence provided by the Vikings which was the first photo of the face on Mars, it really resembled an Egyptian Pharaoh. Even a few scientist believed that it was an alien artifact and it even became a pop icon. It was starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines and radio talk shows which mean people actually believed it. The face on Mars attracted many people's attention. Which is why people could say it's real since the majority believes it but what really matter is how it's proven. It was proven using a camera that snap pictures clearly. Everyone was later informed that it was just a natural landformed because of the picture taken in 2001.
In conclusion, the face found on Mars was just a natural landform that looked like a face because of a blurry picture taken by the Vikings in 1976. Many scientists and people believed that it was real but it was just an illusion to the human eyes. In 2001, Marlin's team took a snap of the face on Mars which prove that it was just a natural landform. Garvin compared it to the landforms on Earth so that people could understand and believe that it was just a natural landform. Therefore, the picture taken in 2001 was an evidence that proved that the unusual face found on Mars was just a natural landform. | 34
|
2150433 | Cars have long been viewed as a common method of transportation from point A to point B. However, in the world that we live in cars have become a burden and limited use would be best. Efforts to reduce car usage have shown to reduce the rate of carbon dioxide produced and smog. The elimination of car use would lead way to further development for other methods of transportation. Countries have taken the first step in banning car usage and its citizens have admitted to living nice and happier lives than they had before.
Common issues faced by car use is the production of carbon dioxide and the risk of smog. Smog is a health hazard to those with asthma, young children, and the elderly. By limiting the use of a car, carbon dioxide and smog rates would plummet dramatically. When Paris was faced with smog at near-record levels driving was banned and after a day of the driving ban smog levels were dropping already. Cars, a major contributor to carbon dioxide production, can decrease the rate of the greenhouse effect by limiting their use. Nearly 50 percent of the United State's greenhouse emissions come from the use of cars alone. By not driving your car the rate of greenhouse emissions would drastically decrease.
Besides the nice look to a car, cars are often used because there appears to be no other way to travel long distances. Other methods of transportation such as riding a bicycle, public transportation, and even walking are viable and beneficial methods of transportation. On bike you travel further than you would walking at a faster rate, Bogota has begun the develpment of 118 miles of bicycle paths in hopes of reducing traffic and carbon dioxide emmisions. A near 80 percent of appropraitions are used on highways, the rest of the 20 percent are used on other methods of transportation. By finding other methods of transportation (ie. walking, biking, public transportation) the 80 percent used on highways could be used to greatly improve other methods of transportation, like public transport.
The thought of parting from our cars is a terrifying idea, however countries around the world have taken the initiative and made these ideas law, laws that are benefiting their copuntries. In Germany an ecperimental community, Vauban, has little to no car activity. 70 percent of its families do not own a car and 57 percent sold their car to move to the community. Startingly, not only is this small community a success but many residents claim to be happier than they were when they owned a car. Columbia, like Germany banned the use of cars for one day in Bogota. Not only is everyone enthusiatic of the event but this day has led to the reduction of smog in Bogota.
The question to drive a car is a simple one. Why drive a car when you can walk, ride a bicycle, or can take the bus? By limiting our car use we'll reduce the rate of carbon dioxide emissions and smog. Other countries have tested and proven that life without a car is not only realistic but very beneficial to how one feels. With the options of other forms of transportation we should limit our use of the car. In doing so we'd be improving our lives and the rate of the greenhouse effect. | 45
|
4e38bab | The Electoral College its a process, not an actuall place. The Electoral College process works by a selection of electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for president and vice president, and they count the electoral votes by congress. I think this should not stand no longer because "under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president."This is only one reason why the Electoral College should not be in progress. Another reason why is "If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for [John] Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry."
"This explains why we as a hole nation united in one should change the Electoral College system to election by popular vote this allows everyones vote to be acounted for."The single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. American people should say there pretty lucky that 2000 fiaaco was the biggest election crisis in a century;the system allows for much worse."Consider that state legislature are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people."Now you might be getting an understanding of what I mean by we need to get rid of the electoral college method to popular vote.
"Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. But just because we did not get the electoral college removed doesnt mean we cant still try afterall we were close. The main problem with the electoral college is the fact that "each state casts only one vote, the single representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters. "And if an electoral tie seems unlikely, consider this: In 1968, a shift of just 41,971 votes would have deadlocked the election; In 1976, a tie would have occured if a mere 5,559 voters in Ohio and 3,687 voter in Hawaii had voted the other way. "The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe." That is why the electoral college must end because it lets congress choose who they want to be leader not us.
That is why the electoral college must end because it lets congress choose who they want to be leader not us. That is my reason why. | 23
|
35b9791 | I do not believe that the masked face was made by aliens. I believe that in a varety of reasons.
First, if aliens built the face then NASA would have found where the living area was and they absoulutely did not see any people on Mars. Unfortunetly they did not find living organims living on Mars. Wind is always blowing on Mars so that doesn't mean that aliens made it.
According to the text is states that there are multiple landforms on Earth just like the one on Mars. They When NASA took a picturee that was three times bigger they saw that there were objects that looked like airplanes on the ground or Egytptian - style pyramids or even small shacks. The article states that landforms ae common around the American West. Garvin states that' It reminds him most of the Middle Butte i the Snake River PLain of Idaho. That's a lava dome that tkaes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars.
Then many peope around the world were waiting to see the Face on Mars on TV, but when they saw the picture nobody believed that the face was created by aliens. As it states in the article " As a rule of thunb, you can discern things in a digital image three times bigger than the pixel size." Sometimes when you take a picture, the picture might add adjustments to the photo to make it look more realistic.
There are many places aroudn the world that has matured over time due to landforms. The Grand Canyon, Rivers, Volcanoes, and high pieces of land that look like animals are all examples of things that cahnge over time due to the changing of the Earth. People aren't the only things that make mountains, rivers, and canals most features of the world come from landforms that change over long periods of time.
In the article the Face on Mars changes in a couple of weeks adn that is due to the changing of Mars. The turning of the planets is also another reason of how landforns change. When it is cold, the freezing tmperatures can cause things to ctack adn split open. During the hot weather, the hot temperatures can change things by heating up the land land until it eventually starts to sink. Whe there was a lot of cloud cover on Mars the first time they took pictures it was really difficult to seek out.
I do not believe that aliens had biult the Face on Mars. Eventually they will find the truth and when that day comes then there could be more information and new discoveries. Until then there are more things to learn about Mars. | 23
|
035e3c7 | Dear state senator,
As a law abiding citizen, I feel that the American public should have a say-so in the elections of the President, or any other government party leader, and to do so, should be a direct vote. While our Founding Fathers, with all due respect, chose the Electoral College to pick and choose our leaders, this is the 21st centuary. A centuary in which the government upholds too much power.
The government has been critized quite intensely over the last few years over one topic - lying. Lying to the citizens in which it - should - be serving. Although, it doesn't. The government serves itself. So why should we elect a panel of people to elect for us? After all, when we vote, we - I speak for the entire American republic here - imagine us submitting our vote to count directly for our selected representative. Not for some unknown nit-wit to chose a government agent for us. What if said nit-wit lies, miscounts, or purposely puts his own imput into the system instead of the American voting population?
Direct voting is, perhaps, inevitably more efficient. Our votes could run through a machine, much like a state test such as FCAT, anf the total vote could be directed for either candidate. The chances of a tied poll is rather extremely unlikely due to the masses of the American republic. Plus, it singles out the chance of lying in a government of liars.
Swing states wouldn't exist. Instead of singling out a particular area of the country, they'd be, more so, targeting the country as a whole, because then would every individual vote mattered. No one would be left out, and the more honest, obviously more chosen, president would win out, and almost everyone would be happy.
We live in a system at which the government lies, quite fairly, a lot. A direct vote would whip them out of that in the voting process, as the votes, singularly, would matter. Every last one of them. It would also nip the idea that only certain areas, certain states, mattered, because again, every vote would matter. Directing voting is obviously the way to go.
Signed,
Law Abiding Citizen. | 23
|
e8ce1b0 | Dear state senator,
In my opinoin I think we should absolutely keep the Electoral College system. I think we should keep the way we elect our presidents because it's a non-democrac way. It's also easy and fast by killing two birds with one stone. Our founding fathers compromised the Electoral system and since we can't get rid of our admendments and change the Constitution I don't tink we should get rid of the Electoral College system. It may be old, but new things aren't always the best things. I think if the Goverment wanted to change it they should try it on a state first before they roll it to the rest of the nation, and we all know the goverment isn't that smart and won't do it because we are their test animals.
Another reason to keep the Elctoral system is because it's easy and effciant. If we just have the elction just be based off votes and not popular party it would be messy. The Electoral College System allows certainity of outcome. No run-off election because mostly likely there will be no tie. No arguing about the president being from a certain place or region so that state favors the president. Winner-takes-all system allows the people to pay close attention to the election. Swing states allow a little excitement during the election because some states like Florida you don't know which way they are going to go. Big states also like Florida gets the president on the edge because the can loose every small state and still win with the big ones.
270 votes are not a lot of votes to win an elction with, but every vote counts. Some people may not vote because there are only two parties that most of the nation only cares about the Republicans and the Democrats. Some people dont like tovote in fear of their party not winning due to its unpopularity. But everyone should vote to express there politcal power. That's why we should keep it because if we change it we're changing our minds in the way vote. | 23
|
b3734f1 | Driverless cars. Should they be a thing, or shouldn't they be a thing?
They are capable of many things and they're not even fully made yet. They could be capable of sensing other cars or danger. For example, Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, there's a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, and many more things. I think these cars should be a thing in our society because they could benefit us in a lot of ways.
Yes, these cars aren't 100% advanced right now, but, so aren't electric cars, or cars that run on gas. Cars are cars, they will always get better through out the years. No car is a right car. Smart cars seem like a good idea to me. They are basically... smart. Just like our cellphones they can play music, tell you where you are if you're lost, you can even call people from them. Also, fuel wouldn't be such a big problem. We would use less gas, less gas means less money the U.S. would borrow from other countires. They could help our new generation in many ways.
I agree with the development of the cars because they seem much more safer. Like I mentioned, their sensors are well advanced. They could sense danger. When you're not paying 100% of your attention to the road, your car would let you know whats going wrong. That right there tells me that smart cars could reduce deaths by a lot. Most deaths in the U.S. are caused by driving, if your car lets you know that something is wrong, it basically just saved your life.
Lastly, smart cars could be useful for us in this new generation. People like to text, but thats a horrible idea when you're driving. If you text while you're driving you're basically risking your life. Smart cars could read your texts when you're driving. Also, people don't like being late to work, school etc. Most of the reasons why people are late is because of bad road conditions or traffic. Yes smart cars can't drive around these conditions but Google cars alert the driver to take over the wheel when things like this happens. Also they have a gps on them, since they're made through google they could have google maps in the system & that could tell you the fastes route to your desired destination.
I totally agree with the development of these cars. These cars could benefit us in many ways and are well advanced for our generation so far. They can help you find the fastest route to your destination, they would reduce the use of gas by a lot. Also, they can sense danger & warn you. That seems like a huge positive safety feature. Lastly, they can drive independently under specific conditions. If conditions are bad, they alert you to take over the wheel. So yes, I totally agree with the development of these cars. | 34
|
22f55dc | This is from the NASA facility er do not have fool proof on what made the crator in mars we don't have full evidence on what happend on mars. The face on mars is a mystery and very intersting phnominon and leads to very meracisly things in the future but for futher notice we cant say it was aliens. NASA scientist dont believe that this was alien trying to send a signal or a message to us for all we know a astroid may hit mars and we didnt know.
On the flip side people and scientis have belived and wondered if aliens are real and there is many cases to make people believe there are alien living amungst human along with movies, games, and toys. We are all fasinated by space and still think aliens are real and some think that aliens are not real.
We may never know what amde the face on mars if it was aliens or just rocks making shadows and if we ever find out why there was a face it will be a sight to see in the near future. | 01
|
3d1a0fa | The author did a good job at using details to back up his claim.Every time the author well make a reasoning the author well back it up by using details.So the author also back up his reasoning with a detail.So this is a reason why the author did a good job at backing up his claim.
This is a reason why the author did a good job at supporting his claim by saying the Venus temperatures can go up to 800 degrees and also the Venus pressure is 90 times great than we had expericne on Earth.In the text it says "On the planet's surface,temperatures average over 800 degrees Farhrenheit,and the atmospheric perssure is 90 times greater than what we had experience on our own planet."This says that the Venus temperatures are life theating and also that the pressure on Venus is 90 times greater than what we had experience on Earth.So this says that the author gives a reasoning and a detail about his claim.
So the author did a good job on backing up his reasoning.Also giving out a good evidence.So this is why the author did a good job at using details to backup his claim. | 12
|
422e6e7 | "A new president, really, How many votes did they win by?" If someone were to ask you this what would you say, thirty electoral votes? The "Winner-Takes-All" system is flawed and needs to be either fixed or completly taken down, and here are two reasons why. First a president should be chosen by the people, seeing our county is a democracy meaning that we elect representatives to rule for us, a popular vote fits the sene a bit more than an electoral vote. Secondly if there was every a tie in the electoral college it would catostropic because intead if being in the peoples hand it be in the representatives hands, aslo known as the ones who already have power.
"At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. because of the winner-takes-all system in each state canidates dont spend time in states they spend no time in stats the know thy wont win." Some states can get no canidates out and its because the electoral college is unfair. "It`s official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best argumants in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct election ar spurios at best. Its hard to say but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college!" This Quote states that the electoral college is not fair and down right rediculus. You may say since its getting the job done and there has been no ties whats wrong? there are manny thing wrong startign with popular votes can lose to electoral votes, also some states can get on people to come and campagne.
" In 1968 a sift of just 41,971 could have cause a tie in the polls." in this article just that many people and the representatives could have chosen a president and the reason this is bad is because they will get a president that will do what ever they want. "If there were just 5,559 voters in ohio and 3,687 voters in hawaii that went the other way the electoral college would have tied making a representative choose." " in this article just that many people and the representatives could have chosen a president and the reason this is bad is because they will get a president that will do what ever they want.
So to finalize The "Winner-Takes-All" system is flawed and needs to be either fixed or completly taken down, and here are two reasons why. First a president should be chosen by the people, seeing our county is a democracy meaning that we elect representatives to rule for us, a popular vote fits the sene a bit more than an electoral vote. Secondly if there was every a tie in the electoral college it would catostropic because intead if being in the peoples hand it be in the representatives hands, aslo known as the ones who already have power. | 23
|
2d39dbb | The author shows a lot of support for the idea that studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers in a multitude of ways some of which include interesting facts, to ways how it could be done. He even tells us in the first paragraph saying "it has proved a very challanging place to examine more closely." so it is not very easy to do but it is possibe.
The author even talks about how humans have already sent numerous space craft to venus in paragraph two "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." and just a sentence after that it tells us "numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challanging planet for humans to study, despite its proxmity to us." so the author tells that us despite the issue of how dangerous it is to land there, it still tells us as readers that we are still studying it despite how much of a challange it is, and just because we are close to it doesn't make it any easier to study.
In paragraph four he starts telling us why its worthy, despite how hard it is to study by saying "astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like plane in our solar system." and then continues on to say "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." so he is implying that benefits of studying Venus would be that we would be able to see if there were other life forms on the planet in the past, and that we would be able to find out what happened to the past earth like planet. The author also keeps telling us that Venus can be our nearest option for a planetary visit, so that it would be cheaper to get there and we could try to study it more without spending too much despite the dangers. Cheaper then its counterpart Mars at least. He even tells us of some ways that NASA has ideas for sending humans to Venus so that we would be able to study it without that much effort despite the dangers.
The author even supports his claim in paragraph eight by saying "Striving to meet the challange 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." by saying that he tells us some of the benefits like how studying the planet has value, but he also tells us that we will likely be studying other dangerous planets and that this is just one of the many we will be studying so doing this one is no different and that it would be well worth the challange, but also the insights we would earn from the planet itself. In the next sentence he tell us that "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." the author is telling us that we should not be scared of the dangers and doubts, but that we should improve upon ourselves and shove ourselves to the edge of imagination and innovation, despite the dangers and that it is well worth the risk. | 45
|
bbce450 | Dear State Senator,
In voting for a new president we should keep the process of the Electoral College. The Electoral College is apart of the United States' history. It was established by our founding fathers in the Constitution. If we keep the Electoral College there will be a less chance of a tie and a dispute then there would be in a popular vote process. Also the Electoral College is fair and we would be avoiding run-off elections.
The first reason we should keep the Electoral College is there will be a certainty of outcome. Even though the total number of votes is 538, the chance of a tie is likely ,but highly unlikely. "In 2012's election, for example, Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney....Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state," this means that a tie is not likely, but it could happen (Posner 18). If we used the process of popular vote in the United States there would be a bigger chance of a dispute over the outcome then there would the outcome of an Electoral College.
The next reason we should keep our historical process of the Electoral College is it's fair. According to an excerpt from "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" from
Slate Magazine , "the Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal" (Posner 19). This means that all states are equal and none of them have more or less power than one another and none of the states have enough power to elect a president. Bradford Plumer from
Mother Jones thinks "It's official: the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational," there are many arguments that state that the electoral college is unright, many people disagree saying its a great system involving easy and fair processes.
Also the Electoral College reduces the pressure which complicates the presidential election process. With the Electoral College the problem of elections where none of the candidates have the majority of the votes cast is avoided. "For example, Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College" (Posner 22).
Keeping the Electoral College is very important. First off it is a part of our nation's history. It also keeps electing a president easy, fair, and non-pressuring. Even though the method of the Electoral College is outdated and old, it still is a good way of electing a new president. This process keeps disputes from occuring and makes all the states be heard and equal. | 34
|
a4b330d | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author encourages humanity to rise up above the obstacles that have stopped us from exploring Venus in the past, and push forward into uncharted territory. He cites several reasons why humans might want to explore a planet with such harsh and unforgiving conditions, and he gives examples of solutions to the problems that these conditions cause. He uses compelling evidence and inspiring diction to support his claim that humanity should work towards exploring Venus. He supports this claim very well. One example of the evidence that he uses to support his claim is the fact that Venus bears many similarities to Earth, making it valuable in scientific reasearch. In paragraph four he writes: "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." He follows this up by explaining that gathering information about Venus could very well provide us with valuable information about our own planet; Earth. The author uses this evidence as the main reason that scientists would benefit from exploring the surface of Venus. One problem that the author encounters is the extremity of the conditions on Venus. However, he offers solutions to this problem later in the article, when he provides information on how NASA would combat the dangerous conditions on the surface and explore Venus without any harm coming to the people involved. In paragraph five he writes; "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the Venusian surface." The author includes this example of a solution for the harsh conditions of Venus to compell the reader towards believing that exploring Venus would be a valuable use of time and effort for human civilization, due to the fact that it is not only rich with information that could help us explain our own lives on Earth, but also because on the surface of Venus could collect this information without having to risk the safety of the explorers that are involved. This is a powerful use of evidence, because it provides examples of why we should attempt to explore Venus, and it then works towards removing our doubt of this claim by giving us evidence that the risks that would be faced on Venus could be reduced significantly. In conclusion; the author's claim that humanity would benefit greatly from travelling to and exploring Venus is well supported, with both evidence that supports the idea that the information that we would gain would be valuable to us, and evidence that the risks that we would have to take would be small enough to ensure the safety of the people involved. The author inspires us to look beyond what we have at the moment and strive for a better future; one where we can become a multi-planetary civilization that has the ability to explore other planets and, perhaps, other stars. | 45
|
fb794cf | Cars are an integrated part of our society, but they are becoming less and less popular as the years progress. There are many advantages to limited use of cars. By restricting or eliminating the use of cars, the world would be a greener, safer place.
First and foremost is the fact that green house gas emissions could be cut by up to fifty percent in places like the United States. According to Robert Duffer, after restricting driving in Paris, the French city saw the sky clear after just a few days. Elizabeth Rosenthal and Andrew Selsky agree that the reduction of car usage would result in a significant decrease in smog and carbon emissions.
The most significant effect, however, would be the safety of cyclists, joggers, and children playing in the street. Every parent worries about their child being hit by a careless driver, so reducing the usage of cars would make car accidents virtually nonexistant. Elizabeth Rosenthalsays that in Vauban, the "swish of bicycle chains and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional motor." It sounds like heaven, but really it is only a group of people that are dedicated to a safer, greener world.
Finally we have a world full of conveniences for us, but if we continue to treat it this way, it won't survive much longer. The Earth won't be around forever, but we should do everything we can to prolong its life. By limiting car usage, we can make the world a safer place for everyone, as well as a healty, beautiful place to live. | 23
|
b3fe753 | Luke helped innocent people and now other people should to. Helping isn't just being nice. It is also about caring sharing and giving. Not disrespect, mistreat, and ignore.
All people deserve the same right. luke got injured and he had to rest for a couple days but he stil went on to finish the mission. He didn't even have an idea that his life was gonna change he just took the chance when it was offered and he never doubted it.
After the war he joined the UNRRA(the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration).Luke was only 18 when all of this happened. He helped out at his aunt Katie's ranch for most of his days when he was just a little boy. He helped with the enviorment and cattle and other animals at the places where ww2 took place. Alot of people died but not in his hands.
Brave people survived and never forgot the memory of ww2. Luke being a Seagoing cowboy was the thing that he was most proud of. It opened up everything and everywhere to him that made him feel awesome for helping out arround the world instead of just watching other people take his opportunity. | 01
|
36e8507 | I believe that we have seen a face on mars is not true, why because i believe it could be just the shape of it and make it look like a head shape figure and then in pargraph 3 it said that, it noted that it was a huge rock formation giveing the shape of the head and plus the shadows that make it seem like these eyes and nose to the head on mars. Over the pass could of years the face on mars has change it really didnt look like a face to meand thats in 1998. But by 2001 it just look like a mount of dust, and it really dont look like a face at all to me and the story also said it could be the artifact of aliens doing, well theres no such things are alines and thats what my agrument more reasonable tp believe and prove its just a huge rock that on mars and have shadows on it to make it seem like has eyes,nose and a mouth. This is why i believe it not a face on mars and not the work of alien doing. | 01
|
75296c2 | In my opinion I think that this "Face on Mars" is a landform. For one, we have never seen an alien or have any trace of aliens. I think that we think it has something to do with aliens because it is in a face shape like us. But honestly, huge rocks or huge meterorites could have caused it to look like that. Also there hasn't been any sight of life on Mars because of the conditions. If humans couldn't live on Mars, then how could aliens?
Huge rocks and huge meters crash into the planets and moon all the time. I honestly think that it is the rocks or something in space that caused this. I don't think that there is any sight or any posssible way that there could be life or aliens on this planet.
When they went to go see again and go check out the "Face on Mars" they didn't see anything, there was no alien monument. They also talk about how it is very hard to be able to see the "Face on Mars" I think that if there was a possiblity that it could be a bout aliens and this "Face on Mars" appeared because of aliens then there wouldn't onlly be one face. I think that if there were tons of face looking landforms then maybe there could've been life on mars for aliens. Since there were no other faces that could've been another alien, I don't think that there is a way that this has anything to do with aliens.
It also states in the passge that you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size. He states that if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids that you would be able to see them.
If you could make things larger and see farther into the picture than I think there would've been more to find. There wasn't any other sign of aliens found in the picture. I think aliens for sure having nothing to do with this, but at the same time they could have.
I think if scientists really were able to go and see this i think they should study the face more often to see if there is any evidence of any other alien or any other landform that has to do with them. My personal opinion is that it has nothing to do with aliens. | 23
|
f075e71 | I
think the rock on the surface of Mars is a face or that a alien has made a face.The rock just gives the form of a face a dont think it is.I think by the way people look at the picture they might think it may look like a face.I think that beacuse in the passages it says the NASA send another spacecrft up to Mars in April 8, 2001.It was a cloudless summer day in Cydonia and Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look.The spacecraft had to go 25 degrees to the center of Mars to get a better view for the picture.The craft or the team capture a extraordinary photo using the camares absolute maximum resolution.The picture actually show is the Martian equivalent of a butte or a mesa-landforms common around the American West.Garvin kind of explains that the face
remains him of
aMiddle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. Which is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same hiegth as the face of Mars.So the first picture was tooken in April 1998 and it was a winter season in Mars which makes it hard to see clearly if it does look like a face or not.My opinion is that the rock does look like a face.It has the form of a mouth, a nose, and even the eyes.Thats my opinoin. | 12
|
04128c7 | Driving cars that could drive you anywhere as in a taxi or your own car are finally coming to our furture and comig fast. There are many people out there who disagree on the idea Google has came out with. There are many different reson why you should and should buy this car they can be seen in positives and negatives. My reason when it comes to buying a driveless car is that you should or try to get a driveless car, but on the other had there are some bad reason why you shouldnt.
First few positive reasons I think you should buy this car is because its a proven fact that it can lower the risk of texting a driving. Since the 2000s the rate of texting and rving drivng has went up a massive of numbers. And plus they made a few models of the google car back in 2000 for a special track and it proved that its safe and could lower the stakes of a accident. They took one to the street and drove it 1 million miles and havent even crashed yet. But when it comes to parking and coming in a drive way its up to the driver to do that.
Then when it comes down to the gas its very conservant. For an example when the driver is sleepy or had a long day at work they can take a little nap whe its in driveless mode. If there are any roadblocks or construction problems the car will alert the driver that it is time to take action and drive. And if there is any misconveince the car will knock down the speed to about 25 mph. This furture car can turn, accelerate and even brake. Is this what we been waiting for all of our lifes?
Finaly when it comes down to buying this car do it!! Who would ever imagine a car driving itself when ever the driver needs it to. Like a friendly robot that is always there for you when you need them. In this few positives and barely any negatives my addvice is add the new car to your collection or garage. | 23
|
cb202d1 | Using the Facial Actrion Decoding System in the classroom would be valuable. There are many benifits to using this program in classrooms. Many students do not enjoy the time they send in school, so this could be a revolutionary approach to changing the way the American school system works.
One of the reasons the decoding system would help students is that it could help inhance student's grades. Because thecomputeris actively trying to bring the student's mood up, it could hep them to fully enjoy the information they are given. If the computer is constantly trying to inhace emotions, liking the material will cause the student to enjoy learning more. If a student truely enjoys what they are learning, they will work harder to do well in a class.
Another reason the decoding system would be benifitial to classrooms isbecause it could help students understand the concepts better. Not liking classroom material results in students not fully understanding the material and not wanting to pay attention. They soon become easily sidetrack and loose sight of remembering the information later on. Knowing that they enjoy the concepts will help with the understanding of the material. As stated in the text, " A classroom computer could recongnise when a student is becoming confused or bored" and also states, " Then it can modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Some might argue that a human instructor may be able to do just as well relaying information as the computer, but most of the time a teacher must give the material to the class as a whole, and can'tfocus soley on individual emotions of the student, and if every student is enjoying the lesson.
The last reason why the coding system would be benifitial is because it could help with teenage mood swings and depression. teens seem to be less happy when they are confused and overwhelmed by schoolwork, and helping to adjust the material based of their moods could help increase their level of happiness. Helping to improve their happiness during school hours might in turn help them to be more happy overall.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System would be valuable in the classroom for many reasons. It can help to inhance grades, help students understand concepts better, and help with the teenage moodwings. | 34
|
1d7c97a | Driverless cars are the future for daily travel. Driverless cars have a great potential for the future, they have been on the rise of development and new and more productive ways are being introduce to make the cars. These cars are the future for travel because of their ability to copy the skill of human drivers, their potential for new ways of being made, and for the ability to let the driver take charge of the situation.
Driverless cars have been devoleped to be able to copy the ability of human drivers through multiple sensors and laser technology. In the article its stated "...far better response and control than a human driver could manage" the article is talking about the advancement in just the brakes of cars, with the technology already presented, cars that are able to copy the skills of humans and possibly even have more skill and control of the road than humans already do. Sensors along the car allow the car to view the streets and obstacules like a human does, and the addition for even more sensors just expanes the vision of a car, allowing the car to have more knowledge of the street and possible dangers that are ahead.
New technologies are always being manufactured and produced, as well as the advancement of driverless cars. Some cars that are in the market or in the road now even have the technology to warn the driver of any potential dangers, traffic, and many others. In the text it talks about how smart roads were a possiblity for the advancements of cars, that still may be possible with the advancements being made in sensors and radio wave technology. Smart streets and smart cars can work together to develop the future for everyday travel.
As advanced cars can become and how extraordinary then can be, humans with always be needed. Modern day cars now have the potential for being perfectly driverless, but still need the help of humans to help the car manuver itself through tricky areas. Smart cars now a days just don't the technology for the perfection of driverless driving, but they're still be to function without the need for a driver over must normal areas. Cars that aren't able to go ahead without the help of a human driver have the technology to warn or advice the driver for when to to be alert and ready to drive, as stated in the text "In 2013, BMW announced the development of Traffic Jam Assistant".
Driverless cars will greatly change the future, and everyday travel. The ideas and advancements in the car industry will make that possible. Driverless cars will be the step that takes us into the future of this world, by their ability and technology to be able to copy the skills of humans, as well as their potential for how they are constructed and made and the new technologies that are invented , and the option to let the driver actually take control of the car whenever need, these are all the advancements and ways that driverless cars will be the future of everyday travel. As the world progresses driverless car will be a daily part of life then. | 34
|
990a4a3 | As the world and technology keeps on developing, there are many changes and advancments being made to make life easier, or so we think. Google cofounder Sergey Brin has made an envison come to life, and his envision is something you might see as impossible. He envisions a future of public transportation; but with driverless cars. Many may find this development as dangerous, the fact that the cars are not truely driverless, makes the human take control of the vehicle at certain times, major road construction for the car to drive safely, and some states finding it illegal to test computer driven cars might have something to do with that.
First off, these cars that claim to be "driverless", are in fact not driverless. In paragraph 2, it clearly states, "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash, but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents." So the fact that the car are truly not driverless and that you need to be alert the whole time and take the effort to make sure you don't crash into someones mailbox is quite sketchy.
In addition to the cars not being fully "driverless", the cars would need to work on fixed roads. In paragraph 3, it states, " These-smart road systmes worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to exisiting roads, something that was simply too expensivre to be practical."
Needless to say, the fact that you are spending over what you need to be for this technology, and the roads with the wrong sensors is too expensive and unnessecary.
Also, in paragraph 9, it says "As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars. California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia have lef the country in allowing limites use of semi-autonomous cars; manufactorers believe that more states will follow as soon as the cars are proved more reliably safe." Proving that these states to not allow the use of self driven vehicles because they are very dangerous.
In conclusion, the "driverless" vehicle is a bad idea for many reasons. Not truly driverless, making you take control of the vehicle at any time under conditions such as traffic and reversing, major road construction, and being illegal for you to test in certain areas because of the risk that the idea puts out to the public. Driverless cars should not be the future, you should not have the depend on them to get you from point A to point B if you have the ability to drive with two hands. | 34
|
31e4327 | The Challenge Of Exploring Venus
My Claim that
support the passage is " Do Not Judge A Book By It Cover" despite the facts that venus is one of the brightest points in the night sky, it was simple for amateur stargazer to spot. Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size and closest in distance. The only difference between the venus and earth is the speed because sometimes we are closer to venus because it is always around the corner.
No spacecraft has ever survived landing on venus. Venus is marked as the challenging planet for human despite the promixity and the similarities they both share. There is 97%
carbon
dioxide which bblankets venus and it is more challenging due to the highly corrosive sulfuric acid in its atmosphere. The atmospheric pressure in venus is more greater than what we experience on earth and also it has the hottest surface.
According to Paragraph 4, the astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have been the most earth like planet in our solar system. Venus was for once looks like earth which includes different oceans and some rocky sediments which partains to mountains and valley. Eventhough venus is no more condusive for human being it is still consider as one of nearest option for planetary visit for humans. NASA are compelling ideas for sending human to study venus. The possible solution for NASA to study will allow the scientist to fly above the fray. If blimp-like vehicle hovering above the venus was created this would be of help to the astronants to complete their research because the vehicle won't come down to the surface of the venus that low, but there would be a lot of solar power and radiation so that the condition can be survivable for the humans.
If a ship orbiting safely above the venus is created this wouid
help to provide some insight about the ground conditions because most form of light can't penetrate the dense atmosphere so this will render any form of photography in effective and also things cannot be picked from the surface of the venus, so with this scientist is planning to conduct a thorough
mission to understand venus would need to get up close despite the challenges they're going to face. According to
paragraph 7, NASA is working on other approaches to study venus examples are some simplified electronics made of silicon and also using the mechanical computers to study the surface of the venus but using a modern computer can be delicate because of the the risk it entakes.
Finally, for scientist to study the Venus they need to create some powerful equipments that can be of help to them. Venus is large but due to the risk, it is made difficult for scientist to study it. | 01
|
7cdc02d | Did you know that the planet Venus has a lot of Earth like similarities? Well in the story "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author supports this idea giving factual evidence one being,Venus is somewhat referred to as Earths "twin", Venus has a dangerous climate and dosen't have the resources needed for our living conditions, and Not a single spaceship has been to Venus in more than three decades.
First of all, Venus is somewhat referred to as Earth's "twin". In paragraph two the author explains one way of how Venus and Earth are the same. The author states " Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size,and occasionally the closest in distance too." In this way the author is implying the physical features are similar. The author also states that " Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to Earth. Like Mountains, rocky sediment, and even valleys." Even though Venus has the same physical features as Earth its not the same as the things we need in order to live.
In addition, Venus has a dangerous climate and dosen't have the resources needed for our living conditions. In paragraph three the author gives a description of the conditions on Venus. The author states that " A thick atmosphere of almost ninety-seven percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere." This here states that if humans were to travel to Venus they would not be able to survive because Venus's atmosphere is different from Earth. Not only that but the author also states that " On the planet's surface, tmeperatures average over eight-hundred degrees Farenheit." With that being said these living conditions are to extreme for humans to encounter because the pressure is ninety times greater than what humans expeirence on our own planet.
Finally, Not a single spaceship has been to Venus in more than three decades. In the text it says "Such an enviornment would liquify an metals" With this being said everybody know spaceships are made of metal and that is why no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. The text also states that " Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation of being a challenging planet for humans to study,despite its proximity to us." In the end scientists are working to find better ways to advance in their technology and spacecraft to be able to continue their journey on Venus.
In conclusion the author suggests that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Because Venus is somewhat referred to as Earths "twin", Venus has a dangerous climate and dosen't have the resources needed for our living conditions, and Not a single spaceship has been to Venus in more than three decades. With these pieces of supporting evidence this explains the authors purpose in explaining why Venus is a worthy pursuit despit the dangers it presents. | 45
|
3e1faa5 | Not one human has ever seen a living species in Mars or in any planet. In 1976 an odd feature appeared on Mars. Many people think that it looks like a human face. These people believe that the odd feature could be an alien living on Mars.
The news has been spreading around that the "face on Mars" is a creature living in space. I don't believe that aliens are real. Aliens are a figure that someone made up a long time ago hoping that their were more people in the Universe. I know this because if there were aliens in the Universe, someone probably would have already found one.
A lot of odd objects float around in space. The face that people are seeing could just be a meteor. Meteors float around the Universe just trying to make problems. The meteor could have blasted into Mars and created the face like feature. Things like this are not very rare. Meteors have rocketed into Earth a great number of times.
I also believe in Jesus. I believe in every single detail the Bible says. The face could be Jesus showing people that he is watching us. Everything in the Bible has either already happend or will happen in the future. Aliens are not in the Bible, therefore, I don't believe they exist.
If aliens really do exist we would have already found one. Humans have thought aliens are real for hundreds of years. The object could be a natural object like a meteor. Meteors pass through the Universe every single day. What makes this object different? Nothing make the object different. Jesus Christ has all of the creatures we need to know about in the Bible. Aliens are just not one of them. | 01
|
f3d1d93 | In many different countries, driving and the use of motorized vehicles have decreased in the past few years. We have come to learn the cars cause pollution of the atmosphere and the creation and release of greenhouse gases. These deadly gases have led to global warming and the decrease in our atmosphere. We've learned that if we stop using cars and find other, more environmetally friendly ways of transporation, that our contribution to the pollution will decrease ten-fold.
Greenhouse gases consist of CO2 and other chemicals that come from fumes from cars and other forms of exhaust. They are mainly from cars and motorized vehicles. These harmful gases eat away at our atmosphere. We cannot replenish our atmosphere so we have to try and preserve what we have leftover. Therefore, if we cut back on the use of these vehicles, we won't destroy our atmosphere as much as what we have done in the past.
Along with greenhouse gases, smog is also another problem. Smog is a mixture of the fog and moisture in the air combined with exhaust from cars, smoke from cigarettes, and other toxic fumes. We have to have smog checks on our cars at least once a year to see if our vehicles are protected against the chemicals. Smog can be prevented somewhat by halting the use of vehicles. Also, if we don't use cars, not only will we have less smog, but we won't have to pay for the annual smog checks. We'll be helping our environment and helping our wallets.
Don't you hate it when you're stuck in a traffic jam when you're trying to be somewhere on time? Of course, cars are faster than walking everywhere but if there are people in front of you not being able to move because of the people in front of them and so on and so on, then walking would cut the time of sitting in a car and waiting 10 minutes to move 5 feet in half. Most people hate waiting. Also, if we walk, not only will the pollution decrease, the obesity of our country will to! Think about that the next time you start to munch on a bacon cheeseburger.
In the United States, people have begun to lose interest in driving. According to Source 4, less and less people are driving, buying cars, and recieving their licenses. That means that come the next century, our carbon footprint will be half made up for. More people want to walk to lose weight and be able to hang out with friends and colleagues. If we don't stop using alot of fuel, we'll have more money for things that are more important. Motorized vehicles are making us and our economy suffer. Maybe, if we cut back on car use, we'd have more money to bring back our electives and music programs in our countries school systems.
So, overall, if we cut back on vehicles, our lives will be so much better. We wouldn't have to be so paranoid over gas prices. Our air that we breath would be cleaner and our money would be saved. We'd also have less worries about finding a cure for weight-related illnesses. Our country would be perfect without cars. | 23
|
4474e71 | People that think that the face was created by alliens think that beacuase they probably heard that from someone else or someone told them without having any real facts. But if we go into more details i remember once i read/seen something about that there might be some alliens out there in space. The face of the earth was created by natrual landform as NASA has said. On May 24,2001 a spacecraft was circling around when they fount a shadowy figure like a human face! The thing is how will we ever know the real truth behind that. Yeah i know people tell us differnt things but how will we know witch one to belive out of all them. We obviosly have to belive NASA because they are the ones that go up there often and let us know if there is anything new up there. Its not like we can go up there anytime we want and cheke for ourselfs! The bad thing is that we will never find out for our ownselfs but thats just the way things are! | 01
|
70ae282 | In Germany life goes on without a car as people can see that. But cars do reallly excite in germany but they just have big garages for them. THey only have two place to park which is you have to own a house in order to have a parking space for your car. Automobiles are taking to Chicago and Shanghi in order to find a home. The gas to the cars is mostly found in Europe and the 50 percent is found in the United States.
In New York the Suburbs will spread out homes on private garages were dream towns come homes. The cars will be found all over the world. but there for there is two ways to get gas for them. Cars will around during The World War2 as the passage is saying. Now during this time they are making more better cars in this world for people could move around, dont matter if its a truck a car they would find a way too move you around the world. | 01
|
bbe93c1 | Consequently driverless cars have been making a spalsh in popular culture recently. With them being emphazised in several blockbuster movies, and popular television shows. However I don't support the development of driverless cars, and I think its gonna end up causing more trouble and waste of our tax money. Starting with that so many companies are trying to make driverless cars, but none have succeded without a human in the car on actual roads not on special test tracks. This century in my belief is heading way to far into the technology world, making everything technology based. One of these days technology is gonna be smarter than us humans, and take over .
First of all, in the passage in paragraph three it says that, "many futurists believed the key to developing self-driving cars someday wasn't so much smarter cars as smarter roads". So if they do develop driverless cars, they will need to be additionnaly money spent on remolding the roads we already have to accomdate to these new driverless cars. That was even stated later in the paragraph where it says that, "These smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply to expensive to be pratical". Plus with the millions going into developing these driverless cars, this development is simply too pricey. Along with that the money going towards these developments will be from us, taxpayers, and the government. When this money can simply go into our education or the poor, something thats good for the people instead of a project that we really don't need.
Futhermore progress towards driverless cars, has been that the car can handle driving functions at speeds up to twenty-five mph, but special touch sensors make sure a human driver still keeps hold of the wheel. So far that is still a long way till driverless cars, since so far none of the cars developed have been completely driverless. Although who wants a driverless car that still needs a human driver ? Like for example in paragraph seven it says that, "In 2013, BMW announced the development of 'Traffic Jam Assistant'... they can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notfiy the driver when the rpad ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents". Whats the use of spening a fortune on a driverless cars, when we humans can just drive the car ourselves ?
Finally when and if driverless cars do became a reality, they will need to be additionally laws and rules put in place to accomdate the new development. Also with that driving books may be slight more complex, driving schools will be teaching whole different units insetad of learning to drive, it'll be more of what to do if something happens to the driverless car. Futhermore a line from paragraph rasies questions where it says that, "even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident". Whose fault would it be if there was a accident within a driverless car, the driver or the manufacturer ? That is exactly why Im against the development of this, because it just complicates things.
Utlimately driverless cars do appear cool and hip in the popular culture these days, but thats not reality; and im not sure reality is ready for this project. Not only is this development of driverless cars time investing, but also expensize too! Also the ones that have been developed so far, still have a long way to go before they are completey driverless. In addition to, safety concerns arises with this development like what if there was to be an accident or wreck. Lastly we don't need driverless cars, when we have humans who can drive the car itself, just like we have been doing for the past generations. Have you ever heard of the saying, 'stop creating the wheel' ? Meaning we already have a wheel, so why try to keep creating another one, just like we already got drivers, humans. We don't need computer operated cars to do the driving for us! | 34
|
480146f | Cars are one of the most popular modes of tansportation. They are used widely across the United States and the world. Technology has grown to an unbelievable hieght. With this, comes the driverless cars. Driverless cars are extremely useful and are the cars of the future.
Driverless cars can be used for many things. The text states, "The cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer more flexibility than a bus." Google cofounder Sergey Brincan explains that driverless cars can be used for so much more than individual vehicles. They can be used for big populations and could carry a lot of people.
These cars can alert drivers of dangers on the road and steer them in the correct way. The passage reads, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." This suggests that although there may not be an advanced technology allowing complete driverless cars, these vehicles can stop the car and warn the driver that danger is ahead.
Google has developed their own type of driverless car. The text states, "Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009." The technology for driverless cars is not as new as some people might think. This idea has been around for more than six years. The text also states, "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash." This illustrates that the smarter cars are also safe.
Driverless cars sound neat, however it may not be reachable. The text states, "but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless." This suggests that the technology for this thought may not be completely whole. The text also states, "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." If a driver has to take control of the car, than it is not a driverless car. New technology is being developed everyday. Although a driver may need to take over during an emergency situation, these vehicles have the capability of driving by themsleves.
There are many advantages to having these specific smart cars. They can help people's everyday life and make transportation easy. Driverless cars are truly the vehicles of the future. | 34
|
2169b0a | The long list of benefits that comes from limited car usage are mostly based on where you live and how much you do your part. Laws and restrictions have been arriving across the entire world to see the effects of having little or no automobiles in the community. Other countries that have an intense cloud of smog need to ban car use in the millions at a time to help settle down the atmosphere there.
Life without cars today can be very well described in Elisabeth Rosenthal's article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars . In her article she describes how the community is shaped and condensed in order to make travelling to necessarry places easy through walking or bike riding distance. This is the kind of turn around that the world needs as well. With the amount of pollution happening, this is a good experiment that will hopefully spread all over the planet.
The amount of pollution affecting certain cities across the world is getting rather out of hand. In Robert Duffer's article
Paris bans driving due to smog , he talks about the intense pollution over France's capital, resulting in the partial ban of almost
HALF
of the amount of cars on the road at once. Those who violated the ban's rules were fined, and thousands of cars were impounded as well due the the reaction of citizens when they received the fine. In paragraph 14 of the article, Duffer states that "
Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France ,
after five days of intensifying smog."
The ban clearly worked, showing that it was indeed the heavy number of vehicles on the road all at once.
Programs all across the world have gotten people in the millions to find other methods of travel that did not cause any pollution. Columbia is a huge example as shown in Andrew Selsky's article
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota . In the article, Selsky specifies about how millions of Columbians have taken alternative modes of transport, whether it be hiking, biking, or skating as opposed to general driving. Even on account of rain, the citizens found ways to get about without using their cars. This is making Bogota a more human and social place as well, as Selsky states, "
Parks and sports centers have also bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks."
This event is happening for the good of the people and of the planet, and it seems like everyone is okay with that.
With the way our world is rapidly changing with a new generation and new technology, we are going to have to adapt from our old habits. Young adults are not seeing the full necessity of buying a vehicle when they can get to where they need to go by other means that are less expensive and less harmful to the environment. The need for everyone to have a car is slowly going down. It may never completely go away, but it is reducing greatly. | 34
|
b1c3c6d | Driverless cars could be a great accomplishment. If driverless cars are made, they would improve safety on the roads
Driverless cars can improve safety on the roads. Paragraph 5 says that In the 1980's speed sensors were put on the wheels for antilock brakes, which became more advanced within ten years and made
to detect and respond when there is out of control skids or rollovers. The sensors can apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power to the engine, which cuases the car to have more control over the situation than any human driver could handle alone. BMW has made a car with touch sensors in the steering wheel making sure the driver is alert and keeps their hands on the wheel. GM has made seats that vibrate when the car is in danger of backing in to an object. Some manufacturers are planning on using cameras in the vehicle to watch the driver to make sure they are paying attention to the road.
All these reasons ensure that the driverless car will be safe and and that people will benifit from the driverless car. | 12
|
27c0af1 | Thousands of axious web surfers were waiting when the first image appeared on a JPL websit revealing...a natural landform". Those people must've been really upset upon hearing this news. They had high hopes for The Face to be a creation of alien life on mars. But due to the fact that it's just a butte/mesa, an illusion, and just a piece of rock all together, those people need to accept the truth: Alien's didn't make The Face.
First of all, the Face is just an illusion, or a trick playing with your eyes. An example would be that when NASA unveiled the image, the caption said as quoted, "...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose and mouth..." This example shows that because of the perfect shadow casting, the rock formation on mars is just an illusion that's messing with your mind.
My second reason as to why The Face isn't a sign of alien life is that is resembles a butte or a mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. An example of this would be that it reminds Garvin of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. This example shows that since it may remind people of other landforms that we have on Earth, and that we even have landforms similar to The Face at all, it must be and is a natural landform.
My third and final reason is that The Face is just a pile of Mars rocks. For example, when a foucused picture of this landform went viral, it was clear that it was just a pile of rocks, rather than the original picture, which was 10 times less foucused then the latest one. Knowing this, it is clear that aliens did NOT in fact, create The Face.
Some people might say that aliens mightve moved the rocks there themselves. This wouldn't be the case, considering that there are no clear signs of life on mars currently. No aliens means no alien made faces on mars. It's purely logical that The FAce is just an illusion and a pile of rocks and nothing more. | 34
|
c01e3c0 | Why should people join the Seagoing Cowboys? Well here are six reasons why you should join the SGCB. 1 reason is that you could have a great experance getting to see parts of the world that you haven't seen becasue if you get to other parts of the world you could make paper on the subject for a school project or just tell people about it. Another reason is that you could get your friends on it to so you wint have to go alone and know no one there. A 3rd reason is that you can help people that need it because what if you had something terrible happen to you wouldn't people halp you how much they can. A 4th reason is that you get to be on a boat with animals that would be fun for people that like animals. The 5th reason is that you can have fun with all the other things that you can find to do make it fun in your own way. A 6th reason is that you get a work experance that probly no other kid or adult would that is good because if you wanted a job in the millitary then you could say that "I help in a world wide bad happening and I was a Seagoing Cowboy and I have been to different parts of the world so I know my way around places."that is why you should be a Seagoing Cowboy. | 12
|
173dc95 | While driveless cars can fundamentally change the world, they would be far too much of a risk in reality.
While computer-driven cars are fascinating, self-driving cars are not functionally the same as human-driven cars. Self-driving cars cannot possibly maneuveur throughout the highway, or swerve at the sigh of a small animal from afar. While there are automatic sensors along with laser beams, the touch of a human would be far less risky to not only the driver, but, the manufacturer as well.
Additionally, drivers would become bored waiting to drive, as addressed in paragraph 8. Besides that, if humans do not need to drive cars, but still supervise them from the inside, then it is far more risky for injuries since they most likely will not be paying their upmost attention. This would be due to the fact that drivers would become bored, they would turn on music, play on their phones. Therefore, owning a self-driven car is also another safety precaution.
Another issue with self-driving automobiles is the law. For example, most driving laws intend to keep the drivers, passengers, and pedestrians in a safe haven. However, with self-driven cars, new laws would still need to cover the instances in a case of accidents. If the technology were to fail mid-road, or in the middle of nowhere, what would the driver do? Given the driver to be coincidentally alone, on the road, and in the dark, a self-driving automobile can be crucially dangerous.
Another issue with self-driving cars is the quality of their sensors. What if they broke in the middle of a long road trip, or even on the highway? This would endanger not only the driver's safety, but the safety of others. With technology always comes the risk of malfunctioning. Humans' lives' on this earth are far too meaningful to throw away because of mindless technological cars.
Lastly, the self-driving car can be dangerous because of the lack of work it allows humans. With this, can come laziness. With laziness, comes minimal attention they will pay to the roads. Again, this would risk passengers and pedestrians outside of the driver's car or in the driver's car. For humans not to be aware of their surroundings, can cause great damage. For instance, knowing that their car is self-driven, they will most likely check their phones, stare into space, or observe all the outside forces that do not involve their car.
In conclusion, self-driven automobiles are a dangerous risk to our society today. In order to survive as a society, we must ensue the safety of not only ourselves, but others. Safety is crucial, so let us not risk it. | 34
|
84ce1a3 | Dear Senator,
The topic of the Electoral college is a hot one, and the idea of whether of not to adjust it is contravercial. Many citizen disagree with the process while many are in favor. What should we do? We should change the Electoral College. The voting is based more on quantity instead of quality, and the voting is not coming from the citizen's directly, making the risk of an unfaithful candidate too high and the actual voting less popular and more electoral. When one state-or even one person- could change the whole ball game that is the Presidential Election, then what does that mean for our democracy?
While many will argue that it is a fair way to vote, the Electoral College has many flaws. First off, the candidates are focusing on more power and higher tallying states to get them through the election than everyone as a whole. For example, if you were a presidential candidate would you spend more time trying to sway California, with its whopping 55 electoral votes, or Montanna, with a teeny tiny 3 electoral votes? The candidates are not being considerate of ALL the American citizens, but instead the ones that they think will lead them to victory. This is not what the election is all about. The election is more focused on the popular vote of few states with many inhabitants than it is on many states with few citizens.
"Under the Electoral College system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." (As stated in
"The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong"
). Being that this true, why do we call it the "Presidential Election" instead of the "Electors Election?" Electors claim to be faithful to their candidates but sometimes this is not the case. If a member of the group is unfaithful to their candidate, it could unsettle the whole election, meaning that the United States as a whole would have to pay for the electors actions. This is not how voting was meant to be. Our slogan is "We the People," not "We the Electors."
Now, I know what you're thinking, "Why would we change this system? It is already established and has worked for many years." In order to move forward as a nation we as a whole need to make changes sometimes. Just think what it would be like today if segregation-an established rule and law- was not questioned. Or even if the settlers of the United States had not questioned our former mother country and broke away. We would not even be the establishment we are today if we did not question established rules or traditions. The Electoral College is nothing more than a system that needs to be reevaluated, putting the popularity if the candidate in clearer perspective.
To recap, The Electoral College does not include the popularity of the candidates over official influences. The states are not being counted equally and electors control the electon overall. In order to have a more successful government and a more included population, the Electoral College simply needs to be reevaluated and changed to meet the popularity standards of our country if we are to ever advance. | 45
|
cc1b64a | The sound of everyone coughing not because they're sick, but because the air around them is tainted. Car use should be decreased because eventually, every city will look like Beijing, China does now, or worse, and carbon dioxide emissions rip apart the Ozone Layer.
There is a reason people in Beijing wear gas masks. This city is one of the most polluted cities in the world, according to Robert Duffer in
Paris Bans Driving due to Smog . Pollution causes humans to develop tumors, become brain-dead, have strokes and heart attacks, and many more horrible diseases. Do you really want to have babies, just born, dying because the pollution is too much for their tiny lungs? America is slowly becoming a hive for pollutants. If this keeps up, It'll be unlivable, like Chernobyl or Nagasaki.
Carbon dioxide is slowly ripping apart our atmosphere. If this bad habit of ours stays, Earth will become the next Mars. Nothing would survive on its surface. Do you really want humanity to be the extinction of millions of species of animals and plants, including ourselves? Ozone is what protects the Earth from the Sun's harsh ultraviolet light, and that protective layer of our atmosphere is being drained away. If something as small as Paris, France, which "
Typically has more smog than other European capitals ," (
Paris Bans Driving due to Smog , by Robert Duffer.)can cause so many problems, imagine what is happening with a country as large as America. If our bad habit doesn't change, and soon, then there would be no more life. Do you want to be responsible for the universe's only life, that has been proven, to be razed? "
Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe . . . and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States ." (
In German Suburb, Life Goes on Without Cars , by Elisabeth Rosenthal.) Hybrid, diesel, natural fuel, electric. None of it matters, because they all produce the same effect, and affect our atmosphere.
Do you realize yet that car usage needs to be reduced in order to preserve our precious ozone and Earth's natural beauty? | 23
|
01b55c8 | Fellow Citizens, there are many reasons why limiting car usgage has outstanding oppritunities and advantages.
For an example, If there aren't people out there spending their hard earned money that they worked for, for an expensive car that they are just going to use to get to someplace faster when they could just stop being lazy for once and walk or run, ride bikes, hike, or take a bus, instead of spending money after money to fill a car up to just waste gas, and to fill it up again. Running, riding bikes, hiking, etc. gives you a chance to experience reality. Being outside gives people a chance to see the earths real beauty, and to smell the fresh air. Limiting car usage helps people stay in shape and keeps them healthy if their not just sitting in a car for half a hour when they could be running or walking.
Residents in Vauban, Germany are permitted car ownership, but there are only two places to park : large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home. About 70 percent of Vauban's families do not iwn cars, an about 57 percent sold a car to move there. Having a car makes peoples tense, and being in a place where there isnt alot of car usgae makes people much happier. People who live in places where cars arent used as oftn as other states, those towns place stores in walking distance, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway.
An amazing advantage that people can can from limiting the usage of cars is less drunk drivers, or even none. If there's less drunk drivers, there's less car crashes and less deaths. Everyone understands that you have to be 21 or older in most states to drink alcoholic beverages. The big adavntage out of this is, if older people were to get drunk, they would be forced to call a cab, or even walk home. Their not putting noone else's life in danger, and this would lower the crashes and death fatalities per year.
As as many cars that there is in the world, all the use of them would probably pollute the world. Paris enforce a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city after days of the near-record pollution.
Limiting car usage gives you the oppritunity to be with your family and friends and spend more time with them then you normally would having a car. You can walk and talk with them on the way to work, you can stop by the park and have some fun on your way to the grocery store. The best part about this is, you dont have to worry about the roads being busy. You ca walk, run, hike, and bike without having to hear the noisy streets, the honking, the screeching, etc.
What's the point in having a car that your just going to be wasting money on, when running, walking or riding a bike is free and even cheaper and safer than driving a car. What are you gonna do when your car breaks down? Are you gonna keep spending your money on when it keeps breaking? Why do that when you have two perfectly good and healthy legs and you can run or walk somewhere?
Just take a moment to think about the fines every single person breathing in the world has received? Alot of money wasted on something idiotic huh? just imagine if every state, continents, islands, and places we dont know about all stopped using cars, or even just limited the car usage. We'd be saving a whole ton of money, we'd basically all be middle classes.
This whole situation is a win-win, You get to be with your family 24/7, Running, walking, biking, hiking etc. is all an amazing way to keep people healthy. People dont have to worry about drunk drivers, or car crashes, or car fatalities. People can finally stop spending their hard earned money that they're just going keep spending and wasting on gasoline or to fix your car when its having problems and it breaks. Families can save the money that they would normally be spending on gasoline and start saving for a trip to take their family on to spend more time with them, or to take a trip for yourself.
There are plently more reasons and outstanding advantages that limiting car usage gives you, but these are some of the very best! Just remember, The only good advantages a car can give you is getting you somewhere faster, and keeping you comfortable and safe. But they are also the most danagerous, and expensive things out there. They can take your life or someone elses in an instant, and they can put you in debt quicker than you know! Limitng car usage is for you! | 34
|
ae92436 | Citizens are often using cars to get from work and back, however if citizens were to stop using cars there could be some advantages like traffic can be reduced, new buildings can be built, and habits of car use can be stopped.
If citizens were to cut down on using cars traffic would be reduced. According to Robert Duffer a person from the Chicago Tribune he states that "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France after five-days of intensifying smog" (Robert Duffer, paragraph 14). With that being stated by Robert Duffer it should be clear to people that with reduced traffic people are able to get to places where they need to be in just a short matter of time, citizens won't have to worry about being late for whatever it is citizens have to do. Robert Duffer also states that almost 4,000 drivers were fined according to Reuters (12) Citizens should realize that with almost 4,000 people being fined it should tell citizens that they should cut down on car usage to help prevent smog and to also save them money.
Along with citizens cutting down on car usage to reduce traffic if they were to cut car usage new building can be built. According to Andrew Selsky from the Seattle Times he states that "parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city uneven, pitty sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up" (Andrew Selsky, paragraph 28). When citizens cut down on car usage many new things can be built and explored by citizens but if citizens were to not stop car usage then new things wouldn't be built and old things couldn't be replaced or fixed. Andrew Selsky also states that it has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths (27). There is many citizens out in the world that would rather ride bikes than to use a car just to prevent pollution, with 118 miles of bicycle paths there shouldn't really be any car use. Using bicycles could help change the world so much more and less pollution could be created.
Not only with citizens cutting down on car use for new buildings to be built, citizens can stop their habits of car usage if they give it a try. According to Elisabeth Rosenthal a lady from the New York Times she states that "with all these changes, people who stopped car commuting as a result of recession may find less reason to resume the habit" (Elisabeth Rosenthal, paragraph 36).Citizens stopping car commuting could really help those citizens with habits of not being able to stop car commuting which could result in saving the earth and air pollution. Elisabeth also states that a chairman of the Ford Motor Company proposed a partnering with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which pedstrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety (43). While the chairman of the Ford Motor Company is stating this information maybe citizens will change their minds about car usage just to improve safety or to even safe time.
All in all this why citizens should car usage to reduce traffic, new buildings can be built, and to try and stop habits of car use by giving it a try. Citizens trying to do these could help stop air pollution and they could also save themselves money. | 34
|
2f8022d | PROPER_NAME
MONTH_DAY_YEAR
"What are some advantages of limiting car usage?" You want to know some advantages right? Well there are some advanages like losing stress,relaxing,and helping the envoriment. Bet you didnt know that! but im going to explain to you why know because your probely curious why?
Want to know an of advantage of limiting car usage? Well heres one, as said in source number 3 paragraph 24 "Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution, said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with hus wife." It says that when not usuing a car you can loose stress just by riding a bike because its less traffic and stuff. So when you dont use a car you can loose stress.
But thats not just the only advantage, theres more! another advantage is that it can make you relax as well because then you would be able to spend more "family" time and some "you" time because you wont have to worry about going to places if you cant use your car. Ands thats relaxing because theres nothing better to then to be with your family having fun relaxing.
But that not it! the most advange to this topic is that your helping the envoriment! why you may ask? well like as said in source 3 paragraph 24 " Its a good opportunity to take away lower air pollution" thats some evidence i found because has Carlos Arturo Plaza was riding his bike thats what he said. So he said bascilly that when you use a car your polluting the environment but when you done use a car then not polluting th environment is a advange. So therefore helping your environment is a advange to this topic, and the most important one!
So you wanted to know some advangaes tolimiting car usage? Well you got your answer. i had give 3 reasons to you have some advanages for limiting car usage. As loosing stress,relaxing,and helping the enviroment, these are some great atvanges but theres many more. I just didnt want to list more because i though i would bored you to death! | 23
|
dd43506 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" I think driverless cars is a bad idea. It could harm people inside the car if anything goes wrong. If anything does go wrong with the car and if it hurts someone or even kill someone, manufactures will be blamed for the accident. The people wouldnt be able to trust the company anymore and the company will start to lose money beacuse people would stop buying their cars.
Developing these types of cars sound very cool, but the safety of these self-driven cars is a big concern. No one would want to take the risk of any problems with the car that could lead to their death. In paragarph 9 in the article it says " if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault - the driver or the manufacturer?" the manufacturer should be responible if anything goes wrong. They should be responsible because they made the car and after one injury they should just stop the company of making more because they will continue to hurt people will their product. Somethign could go wrong with the car without alerting the driver and it could go out of control without anyway to stop the car.
Human drivers should have 100% control of their car, because if anything goes wrong it will be against the driver not the car. people trust them selfs better than the car. Some cars cant even handle driving their selfs on their own in some tasks and what if it doesnt alert the driver to take over, this could seriously lead to big accident.
If an accident does happen everything will be blamed against the company. The company will have charges agaisnt them. The company will be force to shut down before another accident can occur. The cars will be seen unsafe to drive, this will give a reason to the people not to buy these types of cars. If people stop buying self-driven cars the company will go bankrupt and everything will go to waste.
If new technology is taking over like cars, no one will know how to fix the car without help of the manufacters who knows what is going on. people wouldnt want to be charged just for them to check on the car and to know whats going on.
This is why I think this is a bad idea. People can get hurt or even killed. I rather stay in control of the car than let a computer take over. | 23
|
dbf7e1e | Hi I am Luke and I want you to become a Sea Going Cowboy. Yes I know what you are thinking, what is a Sea Going Cowboy. Well let me tell you a little bit about it and lets see if you are interested.
A Sea Going Cowboy works for the UNRRA ( the United Nations Relif and Rehababilitation Administration). What I do is I take care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shiped over seas.
Some of the benifits of my job is that if you are drafted into the army you can use this job for your service credit. One other benifit of my job is that I had the oppourtunity to see Europe, and China. But seeing the Acropolis of Greece was the best. So was taking a gondola ride in Venice,Italy, a city with streets of water. I also was able have a tour of the great castle in Crete. Plus I was astounted at the Panama Canal on my way to China.
Other benifits you might like if you like agriculture would be getting to feed the horses, clean the stalles. and pulling bales of hay and bags of oats from the lower parts of the ships. I definitly liked this part of the job because I grew up helping out on aunt Katie's farm and loved every minute of it.
Plus on your way home with out any responsibility to take care of the animals. you can play games like, basebal,volyball,table tennis,fencing,boxing,reading. and willting. These games also helped pass time on the way back from your journey across the seas.
But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than just a adventure for me. This experince made me relize how grateful I am. It also made me aware of people of other countris and their needs. It also opened my eyes up to the world to relize not everything is about me and my little small town, and that there are other peolpe in the world besides me who need help. And that awarenes I was talking about has stayed with me through my whole life. Leading to my family to host a numbe of international students and exchange vistors for many years now. All thanks to my freind Don for persuadeing me to become Seagoing Cowboy. | 23
|
9f37d8c | In the passage The Challenge of Exploring Venus the authur talks about how we should study Venus even though it is dangerous. He believes that even though expolring Venus can be dangerous that shouldnt stop us from trying to explore it anyway.
A claim that the author makes to support his idea that we should explore Venus is that " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value". He believes that exploring Venus could be valuable to us on Earth. Some evidence I found in the text that supports hsi claim is that he says " not only because the insight gained on the planet itself, but also becasue human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. So hes basicly saying we might as well take on this challenge because our curiosity as humans will lead us to more challenges just like it.
So in conclusion that is my essay about the authros claim on exploring Venus even though it could be dangerous. | 12
|
a3762d8 | Cars are an integral part of many peoples' lives around the world: they provide transportation to work and home, they cater to social lives, and for some they even provide a home.
However, it's becoming a trend to limit car usage, particularly in Europe. Residents in Vauban, Germany have given up cars almost completely, with the exception of a $40,000 parking garage fee that over half of the residents have elected not to use.
While it may make getting places harder, the effects of cutting down on car usage are mostly good ones.
First and foremost on this list is global warming. In Europe, cars produce around twelve percent of greenhouse emmissions, while in the US, the number can be as high as fifty percent in cities. This is not good. Global warming is destroying the ice caps and the ozone layer of Earth, leading to a temperature increase that is damaging many enviornments around the world. This, in addition to pollution released by cars and the oil industry, could permanantly cripple our planet. Any way that we can cut the effects of global warming should be implemented.
Secondly, crowded cities benefit in many ways from a lessening of driving. Some cities, like Paris, have already had to enact a partial ban on driving due to a heavy smog layer. Other cities, like Beijing, is even more polluted, and cities in this country suffer as well. If less people drove, the air would be clearer, as was the case in Paris.
Also, there is less crowding when less people are driving. Anyone who has driven through or lived in a large city knows just how bad congestion and traffic jams can be. Less driving would mean less congestion, making it easier for people to get to work, school, or other locations on time. When Paris enacted its driving ban of those with even-numbered liscence plates, congestion went down sixty percent.
Finally, using an alternative to cars can save money. Public transportation could be expensive and, frankly, overcrowded, but it provi | 34
|
bb4fc90 | I am for the value of using this technology in students reading emotional experssions because it helps understand more what the paintings are trying to show, for example when the atricle said in paragraph 1 ( she is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful , and 2 percent angry) A software is the latest innovation and it developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. Other reasons why im for the technology because the process begins when the computer constructs 3-D computers model of the face: all 44 majors muscles in the model must move like human muscles. The movement of one or more msucles is callled an " action unit"
A professor Eckman has classfied six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger,disgust,fear, and sadness then this would associated each with characteristic movements of the facial movements. ( paragraph 2)
My conclusion is that techonlogy is helping us better undertand cultral and seeing the true beauty of it that even in person we can see the diffrences of peoples experssions and their meaning. Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication.. notes Dr. Huang. | 01
|
2240658 | Dear Mr. President,
After reading informative essays on the Electoral College, i believe the Electoral College should be retired and change the election to popular vote during the election of our United States' president.
Although the Electoral College was established by the founding fathers in the Constitution (What is the Electoral College?, 1) it can cause something known as the disaster factor. This happened back in 1960 and 2000. John F. Kennedy was almost replaced by the Democratic electors who nearly succeeded opposing him (The Indefensible Electoral College, 3).
Another worry factor of the electoral vote is a tie. This could mean putting the election of the president into the hands of the Senate. This also makes Wyoming, who has one representative, have equal say with a state like California, who has fifty-five represenatives (The Indefensible Electoral College, 12). This allows for the opposite of the will of the people. Isn't that what we want? The will of the people.
The winner-take-all system in every state also makes the electoral college unfair to voters (The Indefensible Electoral College, 13). Putting the decision of our US president in the hands of a few voters in one state while others don't even get to see the candidates is absolutely unjust.
Although, there are a few reasons we should keep the electoral college. With the electoral college there is always a certainty of outcome (In Defense of the Electoral College, 18). This means that a candidate's electoral college votes exceeds popular vote. This cuts out the factor of a lanslide electoral vote in only one state; keeping in line the will of the people.
The Electoral College process of voting during election time is old, outdated, and unfair to our voting population. As a United States citizen, i think we should leave the election of our president up to popular vote; everyone will have a say and it takes out al the complications of electoral votes and representatives and most imporatantly takes the exact decisions of the will of the people.
Thank you for your time and taking my claims into consideration.
Sincerely,
Aimee Iorio | 23
|
8641cda | This debate about self-operating cars has been in the new for years now. Google say it that they have made one of the first ones. But as our technology has progressed farther, so has our ideas about things. There are many pros and cons on this situation but here are just a few pros and cons,the car keeps you alert, its can cause accidents and it may cause lots of money.
I will start off with the pro of keeping you on task and alert. This is a major pro in this world. Why do I say that? Well, the car has sensors that make you put your hands on the wheel so it knows you are focused. In other words you will not be able to text and drive at the same time. This is the answer to this tradgedy.
On we go with this debate but now on the cons of a self-operating car. There a just as much cons than there is pros. A major con is the accidents. There hasn't been any accident according to the passage but there will be some in the near future. If this happens, who is the blame going to be put on. On the manufacturer? Or what if the person gets injured? The real quesion that it brings up is,"Who to Balme?"
I shall now talk about another con in this peice of machinary. This self-driving car can be very helpful in many ways but the next problem we face is the money. Money is allways a problem when it comes to technology. This car will have to be covered insensor which allow the car to react but it will be very expensive. It also says in the story that the roads will have to be rebulit because of it.
At the end of the day this self-driving car can be both a good thing and a bad thing. But it can keep your eyes on the road, it can cause accidents and it will cost alot of money. | 23
|
e5752c8 | There are many advantages to limiting car usage in our community. Other countries such as France, Germany, and Colombia are home to cities that are working towards cutting down the use of personal automobiles. Many of the people in these places find that using alternative transportation means proves to be less stressful. Studies even show that fewer Americans are purchasing cars for themselves. Now is the perfect time to join in with Vauban, Bogota, and New York and spend less time in our cars.
It may seem hard to believe, but in Germany, there's a suburban area where residents live without their own cars. According to "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" by Elisabeth Rosenthal, the streets of Vauban, Germany remain "car-free" aside from some public transport. The article states that "70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here.". Heidrun Walter was quoted in the excerpt saying "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way..." Communities in Europe and the United States are hoping to move towards this "car-free" lifestyle, in order to become less dependent on automobile usage and cut back on greenhouse gas emissions that damage the environment. We may see an increase in the number of "smart planning" areas across the globe. If a mass of citizens wish to lessen the amount of time they spend in their cars, it's possible, and the city can adapt to a more automobile-less way of life.
Bogota, Columbia dedicates a day to transportation without the use of personal cars, where the city's goal is "...to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog". Many who visit Bogota during this time are impressed by the "revolutionary change" they see unfold before their eyes. Going "car-free" leads to more physical activity amongst residents and an overall nicer-looking community. "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky claims "Parks and sports centers... have bloomed throughout the city... sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks... restaraunts and upscale shopping districts have cropped up.". Not only does the city reduce the amount of greenhouse gas it contributes to the atmosphere, but it results in a more active and better-looking community.
What change would we see in our own community were we to follow in the footsteps of Bogota and Vauban? The United States is seeing a decrease of car ownership in the country. Less and less people are buying automoblies and obtaining driver's licenses. "The End of Car Culture" by Elisabeth Rosenthal says that "...America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling." The writer cites investment research company Doug Short of Advisor Perspectives, which states "...the number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily thereafter..." The country is already subconsciously moving towards a more car-independent lifestyle. The millenial generation seems to be the biggest contributor to this declined interest in car-ownership. With improved methods of communication by means of social media and cell-phones, as well as more use of car-pooling and public transportation, people are staving away from car commuting. While this may require a change within the automobile industry, many agree that this turning away from private car usage will see communities striving to be more time and energy efficient when it comes to transportation.
Limiting the use of cars can lead to a less polluted and stressful environment, more exercise-oriented and upscale communities, and the conservation of our natural resources. Cities around the world are working to become less car-dependent, so that they may limit their contribution of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Were our community to move towards this more eco-friendly, car-free way of life, we would not be alone. | 34
|
3cd190e | I am against the development of driverless cars. I don't think they should develope thesess cars becasue, They still need a driver, they cause an issue with the law and they are inconvient.
The driverless cars this passage is referring to still require the drivers full attation and gidence. The passages states, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skill, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." From this statementwe see that the car needs a human to do difficult task that teh drivers are trying to advoid.
The smart cars are new to the world so there are not to many laws about them creating an unsafe enviorment. The artical states, " As a result, in many states it is illegal even to test-coputer driven cars." There are four states including the Distric of Columbia that allow smart cars. The text also states, " If the technology fails and smeone gets hurt who is at faul-t teh driver ot the manufacturer?" This brings up a new problem. There will be endless amounts of cases having to do with recks. Today with human driven cars the driver is to blame for an accident that leads to the injury of smeone eles. There is no confussions on the matter.
The text states, "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting there turn to drive?" If the driver is just having to wait for something to happen so they take over they will loose concertration. People to loose track of what tehy are doing while driving making it to where they dont have to is not such a good idea. The text also states, "The car can handele driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but specile touch sensors make sure teh driver keeps hold of teh wheel. If the driver must keep hold of the wheel the whole time it would be like they are driving the car themselves, giving no reason for the car to be ran by a computer.
I dont think they should contiune with the development of the smart cars. They still need a driver, they cause issues with the law, and they are inconvient. | 23
|
735c862 | The presidential election is an enourmous event that almost all Americans over the age of eighteen participate in. But there is one problem, the system we use for it is outdated, unfair, and just terrible! The electoral college needs to be removed because voters need more power, and there are tons of problems that come with the electoral college.
There are some pretty solid defenses for the United States to keep the electoral college. For example, as stated in in the article by Posner, even though some candidates can dominate regions, "no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president." But the thing is, even though it might not be enough to win the election, it extremely benefits the candidates race. Another defense states in Posner's article is that the trust of the slate of electors that you are actually voting for is "rarely betrayed." This is a flawed defense because it shouldn't be rarely betrayed, instead, it shouldn't be betrayed at all!
Since the trust of voters in the slate of electors can't be betrayed, why not put the power in the voters hands instead of people most of the voters have never even met? The voters aren't even voting for the president in the electoral college system, they are voting for a slate of electors. And in the text written by Plumer, that the voters can't even control who they're voting for! Another claim in Plumer's article to back the last sentence up is: "The House's selection can hadly be expected to reflect the will of the people." That is just ludicrous! Also, voters quite frequently "get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidates."
That just goes to show one of the extreme amount of problems that the electoral college system has. As stated in Plumer's passage, one of the biggest problems the electoral college system has is that "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct electioin to the kind we have now." But, no one can expect them to listen because, you can clearly tell from their system that they don't care about the common voters opinion, but the direct election system does. In Plumer's article, he loosely states that another thing that can go wrong with the system we have now is the state can possibly cheat and send two slates of electors to Congress. It has happened before so who says it can't happen again? "Perhaps most worrying is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote."(John Plumer) Having a tie is just another terrible flaw in the awful electoral college system that the United States runs today.
Most voters can't even have a say in the election if we don't stop running the electoral college system. But, if the U.S. finally smartens up and changes, the presidential election would have much fewer problems and it would put more power in the hands of the people like a democracy should be. | 45
|
27fabca | The new technology can be recognize your feelings, with just see your movements of the 44 major muscle.
And he ask, Can we actually "calculate" emotions, like a math homework? Anyone can know if that idea is possible, but he want a try.
The process begins construct a computer model 3-D of the face, something weir.
We can tell how a friend feeling simply by the look on his face.
By the way, did making happy face is the experiment also make you feel slightly happy? He ask.
But according to the Facial Freedback Theory of Emotion,moving your facial muscle not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them.
In resume, your muscle of your face, not only we can see your emotions, they produce the emotions.
She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry.
At least according to some new computer software that can recognize emotions. The software is the latest innovation from Prof.
The idea for me, is not good, because, if you feeling sad o with depression you don't want that other one know how you can feel, everyone have problems, and sometimes you don't want to said anything. | 12
|
43dea20 | The face is just a natural landform and it couldnt have been made by aliens for certain reasons and here is why. There were no living creatures to be found anywhere on mars. Even in the last paragraph it said it reminded Garvin of most of
Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
"That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the face on Mars." Garvin also said about the Face. Natural landforms are usually formed by Natural events. Probably the same thing that happened on Mars. When Mars Gloval Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, it snaped a picture ten times sharper than the original viking pictures and all it revealed was a natural landform, no alien monument. Although some said that the alien markings might have been hidden by haze, there still was no alien markings to be found after the next picture they took on a cloudless summer day in Cydonia. It was the best 1976 Viking photo and still no sightings of life on Mars.
I do too think there might be forms of life or "aliens" on other planets but just maybe not Mars. After all, Mars is not completly suitiable for life to live on even though its called Earths twin. If we just do enough research, soon we just might find more interesting things to lead us to other forms of life on other planets. | 23
|
80b8f92 | The technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable, because the person could be really down or mad a math problem. Also in the text it said that when a student is confused or bored it can tell that they are so the computer will give them a problem they understand. Plus if a student is having a bad day the computer can detect that so the teacher could ask the student if they need someone to talk to or if he or she needs to go chill out in the health office. the computer can tell that your mad, sad, or felling sick to your stomach because it reads the mucels in your face like when your eyebrows go up from getting suprised or how your cheek bones go up from smiling. Also the computer know the percentages of your feeling the computer can tell you that your 80% happy and that your 10% mad and your 10% bored.
The computer can also tell if you dislike the ad its showing so it wont show anything similar to it but if it shows that you like the ad the computer will put another ad similar to the one you smiled or laughed at. Dr. Huang and his colleague made this kind of computer so that we humans can have better computers and better ways to communicate with each other. So we would know if someone is mad, sad, or glad so we can help them out with what they are going through. But the process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face. But all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Dr. Huang relises that Dr. paul Eckman creator of facial action coding system has classified six basic emotions like happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness then associated each with characteristic movments of the facial muscles.
plus the computer can also identify mixed emotions. the computer can also detect a painting of a face like Mona Lisa. Things like this that detect emotions can help schools parnets and friends to know whats going on with the person and so they can help. But one of the good things about it is that the things you see on the computer you like to see will have something similar to the ad or video you watch. Also the things you didnt smile at wont pop up on your screen because it didnt grab your attention. | 23
|
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
|
8197f4a | the author supports his idea well because there could be fossiles we never even knew exsited on venus and they say that venus is the closest twin to earth so its worth a shot right? honestly we should because what if they discover that venus was like earth and it just changed and killed everything else off and all the oceans and seas evaporated and thats why theres such a thick cloud above it. i honestly think that they should try because what if venus was like earth and there were other types of life forms on there that werent human it could be ground breaking and what if earth is headed to turning out to be like venus. and if we do find fossils and other things to indicate that there was life on venus and it just all died off because of the heat. we could learn how to prevent it happening to earth with future generations. | 01
|
a469ac9 | I think the idea of the driverless cars is a really good idea. one reason i think it a good idea is because if i was driving and i needed something off the seat but i couldn't get it. If put the car in the mood where i didnt have u stear i would be able to get it . Another reason is why i think driverless cars is a good idea because its not like the car isn't smart is just that some pople dont like it bc they think
it'll cause an accident faster. Most accidents happen because a person isnt paying attition not because of there car not working. I think even if they did release the cars out to the public the cars wouldn't not work out because of the cars i think it would be because the public would abuse the teconolgy.This is why i think it would be a good idea to put out the driverless cars. I really think some people would like it | 12
|
5fbfe66 | How do you think the Face was formed. There could be many reasons how the Face was formed. However I think that the Face was not formed by aliens. One reason is, is that they haven't prove that aliens are real yet. Also, that the day they took they picture they said that there was wispy clouds over it. Another reason is that it all happend because of science.
Mars is an odd planet, I've heard people call it the pizza planets because it was red, I think. That's not the point though, the point is, is that the planet has not proven that aliens live on that planet. The face had been thought it was created by aliens. NASA said that the Face was a "huge rock formation" showing the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth. There are more reasons why they face was Face was not formed by aliens.
Another reason is that the day they took the picture, there was wispy winds. In order to take a good picture you need to have good weather. The weather can effect the picture because if it's windy you need to make sure that everything is not blowing around. The wispy winds could have effected the picutre becuase the winds were blowing so the rocks, sand and everything else was blowing around. So, when Viking 1 captured that picture, it can everything else blowing with it. Wind storms happen on planets, I am not sure om which ones but i know they happen-just like how on the sun it doesn't have wind storms but has almosr like volcanic action on it with lave everywhere. There is one more other reason.
One more reason is that is just plain old science. Science occurs in a lot of discussing and working on the planet. When planning to send some sort of machine to a planet, you have to undertand the planet. In 1976 there wasn't the best technology at the time. They didn't know when a storm was gonna come or if they would have to send their machines threw a bunch of metors. When they sent out Viking 1 a win storm occured and the camera on Viking 1 couldn't focus right and that is why it looked like a face.
There are many more reasons why the Face was not formed but an aliens. Some are that it was that aliens have not been proven yet. Also, that there was wispy clounds. One more is that is was all science. Those are resons why that the Face was not formed by aliens. | 23
|
670daa2 | Have you ever been on a trip to cross the Alantic Ocean? A man named luke Bomberger has, and did sixteen times. You can do this by joining the Seaging Cowboys program. By joining this program you can see famous monuments and go through the Panama Canal; you can also experince the work the cownboys used to do.
Joining the this program you can see the most coolest monuments you ever seen! You can see castles and towers on your way to Europe. You may even go in them, and see the gloriuos sightings you'll ever seen in you life. This is what your going to see if you go on this program.
When your on your way to Europe, you will go through the Panama Canel. You can see what the Peoples houses look like, how they live, and what they eat. You can also see how the canael is shaped and how it was formed. That is what is going to happen when your going through the Panama Canel.
Lastly, your proplably thinking its all fun and games. No, your going to work like the cowboys did in the old days. You will be feeding animals and you might be hourly reporting to the captian just like Luke Bomberger! That is all the work you will be doing on this program.
And that concludes the program of Seaging Cowboys. Hope you can join the program and help through our journey. | 12
|
d33e136 | You are the face
craving on the moon. This means that you are a face craving. The text states that "A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The caption noted a "huge rock infomation...which resembles a huan head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, noes, and mouth." The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars. This means that thay have found some evidence of the face craving in the moon. The text states that "Nevertheless, on April 8, 2001-a cloudless summer day in Cydonia- Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. "We had aroll the spacecraft 25 degress to center the Face in the field of view," said Garvin. "Malin's team captured an extraorinary photo using
the camera's absolute maximum resolution." Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best1976 Viking photo. This means that he took a photo with camera to show that he had proff. Conclusion is that he finially had found what was the face look like. | 01
|
87c531e | In "The Chellenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. He goes on to talk about how Venus used to be just like earth, and it preparing us for further adventures.
Venus used to be just like earth so now scientist want toknow what Venus is like now also how earth will end up and try to find thing to see how long Venus has been like this maybe to even see aproximatley how long Earth will last. " If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientist even discussing further visits to its surface? Astronomers are facinated by Venus because it may very well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covnered largley with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, Just like Earth today."
This quote shows how they are so curious becuase Venus used to be just like us. And since some believe in other living being then exploring Venus could be a huge break through is we find anything about there being an ocean or any sign of life, because that would mean that there could be other life out there now.
Humans are very curious creatures. We love to get into things we aren't supposed to starting at infantry. Well scientist are big kids with big toys that can do big things and they are smart and alwasy are wantig to learn more. So whos to tell them that they cant go check out another planet and make history? The author says, "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 becasue human curiosity will likeyly lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be liited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." This quote is showing how even though things are dangerous, as humans we have this curiosity this strive to go beyond what out limits seem to be. Venus is one of those limitaions that we have and we are still trying to land on it and get to know it better. For furture reference doing this with Venus will just further prepare us to more crazy hings that our amazing mids think up one day.
In conclusion exploring venus is very worthy
pursuit despite the dangers it presents because this is preparing us for the furutre and helps us learn more about the solar sysytem we all live in and may very well help us continue a very long journey in the future. | 34
|
dd10951 | As the process of the new technology came out to identify human emotions the value of using this technology. The new technology has play a big rule to read student's emotional expressions exatly and perfectlyt. People are able now day to read other people emotional expression by nature and only by looking to other people faces.
In my opinion I believed that the new technology called the Facial Action Coding System is valubale to read the emotional expressions of students in a classrom and recognize their emotions, because can able to identify a student emotion if the student is happy or sad.
For example, a classroom computer colud recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored and then it colud modiy the lesson, like an effective human instructor. The new technology read students emotional expressions because it has improves accuracy in perceving the emotions of others.
To conclute this essay, the new tecnology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable and is the best way that canidentify human emotions as the new technology has been developed that improves accuracy in perceiving the emotions of others. | 12
|
45373dc | With the new use of technology, the ability to read someones emotion by the simpliest look is within our grasp. The ability to read your emotion is easy as said done. Why not put something like this that can read out faces inside school. Traspass their privacy. Even so, during school it would not come in handy with any student anytime during the day. Being watched by a face recongnition in the home of many, is an event many would not agree with.
During the school year, for example, a high school. Where would a Facial Action Coding System fit into? This would not benifit our education other than waste it. The new technology being used on students to detect their emotions is a privacy violation. Students would not want their face being read and pictured by a new face detection. For example, in the story it says, "Imagine being able to detect exactly how other people are feeling, even when they are trying to hide their emotions." With this being said, this technology invades our space. Some students don't want their emotions being let out; they might want it to keep that private information to themselves, unless they realease it by themselves. This could happen to anyone, even without them realizing it. For example, sitting in the right position across from the Facial Action Coding System, the victims emotion may be violated without their concent. In the story it reads, "...if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a smiliar ad might follow. But if ou frown, the next ad will be different." This text shows a program reading your face in real time for all the time you are on your own laptop. Having your own computer reading your face every second while being in your own home would not be welcomed to many. It's a violation to privacy to use and our freedom.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System would not be of use for students. Our minds and face are focused in a different direction rather than facing this machine to read out emotions. Whether this new technology is useful or not, it would not be of good use for a classroom full of faces. | 23
|
f1c3e51 | Limiting car usage helps in multiple ways from decreasing air pollution to boosting new restaurants bussiness. Others who have completely left their car have seemed more happy and "less tense" as a ex-car owner put it.
An important factor of the decreased usage of automobiles is that it decreases pollution. Cars in Europe are responsible for twelve percent of greenhouse gas emissions. And up to fifty percent in car-intensive areas in the United States. An example is Paris. It had days of near record pollution they had to enforce a temporary driving ban to clear the air. Traffic was down sixty percent and smog was decreasing. The pollution challenged Beijing, China who is known to be one of the most polluted cities in the whole world. Paris normally has more smog than any other European Capitals.
Limiting your car usage also has personal perks besides lower air pollution. Bogota,Colombia has had its third straight year of banning cars people have started hiking, biking,skating and walking to point A to B it helps bussinesses get popular. Parks and sports centers have started sprouting. | 12
|
0a834e9 | The new software update, the Facial Action Coding System can calcutale how people feel or what emotion they are feeling. This software is the lastest invention from Prof. The six basic emotions humans have can be read or showed by this Facial Action Coding System. This new technology is being tested to see if it is valuable in the classroom to read the emotional expressions of students. I belive this tecnology wouldn't be valuable in the classroom or learning enviroment. This technology doesnt benifit the students learning or relate to their school subjects.
Facial Action coding System can calculate human emotional expressions. It calculates how you feel or waht you are feeling. I don't think this software would be valuable in the classroom because it is invading the kids personal space. Having the teachers or the computers always knowing how you feel is creepy. In the artical "Making Mona Lisa Simle" it states that humans perform this task or calculation of reading people's emotions everyday. The artical also states that humans most likly can tell how otheres or how their friends are feeling by looking at their faical expressings. Having Facial Acton Coding System in the classroom would just be unessasary and invading others personal space.
This software or technology only reads humans emotional expressions, it does'nt teach anything or help people learn anything benifiting to school. If this technology was to be put into classrooms it wouldnt be benifiting to the kids or teaching them anything related to their school work. The artical states that the computer would be able to tell when a student is confused or bored while doing a leason. Most schools don't even teach leasons on the computer a teacher teaches them the leason they are learning. Also some kids or even their parents wouldn't want a computer to be reading their childrens emotions 24/7, also the students may not want to be monitored all the time aswell. This technology just isn't benificial to the learning enviroment in that sort of way.
The software update, the Facial Action Coding System is cool on how it reads humans emotions and tells you how they are feeling, but it just isn't valuable to classrooms or the learning enviroment. This software invades otheres person sapce by always monitoring their emotional expressions and calculating how u feel. Some people might find it creepy on the fact they are always being read by this new technology. This new technology isn't valuable to classrooms also because it it is not benifical to kids learning. The Facial Action Coding System doesnt teach kids realting to their school subjects. Teachers teach the leasons and not computers this software would'nt be nessarsy in classrooms. | 34
|
b92da64 | The article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto presents an idea that a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System can recognize human emotion. The article mentions that It can determine your emotion even if you seem like your not trying to express a specific emotion. This would be extremely helpful in classrooms so that students can have a better learning experience.
In the classroom, students tend to let their minds to drift off and sometimes they get confused but they're to shy to say anything. With having this new Facial Action Coding System, the system could modify the lesson plan based on how the students feel about it. For example, Dr. Huang from the article says that, "This classroom computer can recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." This technology would also help the teacher learn more about their students so that they can help them when needed. This technology would play a big role in the future of schooling.
The Facial Action Coding System, is a different kind of computer. It determines your emotion which makes it different from the rest. This techonolgy plays a benefical addition to the classroom. If we incooperated them in the class, students would have a better learning experience and it would help the teachers learn more about their students! | 23
|
c331692 | The world is making considerable advancements in the area of technology. Today there are even smartphones and smartwatches. Recently, there have been rumors circling the world of the newest advancement: driverless cars. There are many pros and cons to smartcars. Driverless cars, if used properly, have the potential to be a revolutionary technological advancement.
First, driverless cars can almost entirely eliminate the looming threat of human error. The cars can forsee danger and exercise the proper actions to aviod the threat of an accident. Soon, they wil even be able to respond to skidding and even rolling over. However, these driverless cars are not completely hands-off. When greeted with the obstacle of road contruction or an accident, the human in the car must take over. The human has more skills in this area, so, naturally, the he or she will take over. With the combination of the human's skills and the car's advanced programming, the car will become more safe and more effiecient than ever.
Next, the driverless cars have the potential to completely overtake all the transportation that we use today. Smartcars are safer, faster, and more efficient. There won't be any more lost pedestrians because the smartcar knows where to take the passenger. There will be more flexibility with schedule because the car's sole responsibilty is transporting people from one place to another. Plus, driverless cars use half of the amount of fuel that a standard car would use today.
Finally, the smartcar can eliminate the stress of driving altogether. Yes, you may have to get behind the wheel for a short period to help your car through traffic, but then the work would be done. Driverless cars give the action of driving an element of relaxation that cannot be achieved through driving a standard car.
In conclusion, driverless cars have the potential to become a great technological achievement, but there can be an immeasureable amount of controversy. If laws around the United States can be passed to allow smartcars, then the door for technology can be opened. But what if an accident occurs? Whose fault is it? These are questions that can only be answered in time. But, if given the chance, driverless cars have the potential to be a great advancement if use properly. | 34
|
b6aa357 | I think that it was a real face, why you ask? Because that could of been a life form, and that could of been were it fell down. Where else would a face in the moon sand be like that for no reason. Like conol sanders always says its finger lickin good. Thats why theres a face there in the moon. Ancient tribes could of lived there before we even discovered the moon orbiting around the planet earth in the first place. There are many theroys about the moon to be exspected. I think that any reason could be leggitimint when kernal sanders made KFC he didnt suspect a thing he just made a ton of chicken with no reason to stop and think. Thats just like a way of discribing any way is possible when you were not alive long ago. Because you didnt have the technology to even try, to see if there were anyone on the moon in the first place. Think of it as saying mabe the didnt even breath the oxygen they could just breathe in space. It seems imposible i know but mabe to the kind of life on the moon didnt need food water or air.
I think that every type of answer can be juged by the way it sounds but there many ways it could happen. like mabe before it was the moon it was a planet to with life on it just like earth with water, food, and resources to stay alive a a point in time long ago. But when it smashed into earth all of its compounits swichted at impact. Burning every living thing on the moon and making things for the earth. My reason is that god made life but when he did he made life on the moon to but eventually it died out before our time and leaving a souless moon for the earth to smash into it 2.3 billion years ago. Creating earth and life, humanity, and the world. When the found the face in the moon, they were just then finding out that the moon may have contained life long ago. Although it might not of happened how I explained, there might of been another way of life its self on the moon. I think it could of been a rational way, but we will never know untill the end of time. As if there was life created on the earth just the same way a little time ago. When the face showed up it was unbelible. | 01
|
6539b8d | The author is trying to slowly but surley teach us about the"evening star" which is venus. Although we can examine the planet from a far it wouldnt be of any use if unable to look at the planet closley. Also called the earths twin which only means their close in density and size and close in distance at times. Numerous spacecrafts have been sent to explore the cloud draped world and every mission was unmanned since no spacecraft managed to survive a landing for more than a few hours.
Venus's atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide and contains highly corrosive sulfuric acid which wasnt safe for ant man or woman. These facts are little to none to what we could learn if we advanced our technology and support on the idea of exploring venus. NASA had thought of an idea to get closer to the planet which involved a blimp like vehicle hovering over the planet safely. This planet has value and our exploration shouldnt be limited by danger our own curiousity will lead us to explore deeper and ever far more than needed. | 12
|
6dee91b | Voting for president should be fair and democratic to all the people. Decisions for the country that affect the people should ultimately be determined by them since their lives could be greatly impacted by those decisions. Today, the country determines the election of the president of the United States by using the electoral college. Although the electoral college is effective in many ways, does it really portray what the people want? Changing the election to election by popular vote would determine what the people want in a more democratic and fair way. The United States was built upon democracy and that strong profile should be kept.
The electoral college is a process by which voters vote for electors that elect the president determined by their political party. In theory it may seem like an effective process, but it can bring many problems. Source 2 says that the single best argument we have against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. The election crisis of 2000 was because of the electoral college process and that even worse things could have happened. The electoral college has brought a lot of problems. "In the same vein, 'faithless' electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please," (Source 2). Electors refusing to vote for their party's candidtate, or refusing to vote altogether could lead to things like Hawaii sending two slates of electors to Congress in 1960. The electoral college system leads to a lot of complications and using popular vote would make the process simpler.
Voting by the electoral college can bring unfairness to the voting process. Source 3 explains that when you vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors. Your votes do not directly go to the president you want, so even if a president wins the popular vote, they could still lose the electoral college vote and the election all together. "A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes-538-is an even number, but it is highly unlikely....," (Source 3). Voting by popular vote would not allow this to happen because of the amount of people voting and the likelihood of that happening is even less. Also, the fairness of small states and big states is not democratic in the electoral college process. Since larger states have a greater population, they tend to get more attention than smaller states do. There would clearly be more equality in voting by popular vote than in the electoral college.
"The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a poplular vote of qualified citizens," (Source 1). Although this compromise was good in theory at the time, the process is not very fair and does not bring the right people to be elected as electors. The electors are chosen depending on how they reach certain criteria by the law. These laws vary though, which could bring a wide variety of people from each state. This would give some states the upper hand compared to others. There would be no worry about the certain people chosen as electors in the process of popular vote.
The electoral college brings complications, unfairness, and the worry of chosing electors from each state. The Untited States was built upon the idea of general democracy and the process of the electoral college does not carry out that idea. Chosing the president by popular vote would give the people a more democratic way of chosing whom they want to be in charge of the country. The people of the country are the ones most impacted by decisions of the country, so they should have more of a say in what is decided. | 45
|
bb72d59 | The author supports the idea that Venus is a worthy pursuit by including many details that, despite the dangers of venus, we have ways in which we can get past those dangers to complete a fully devolped exploration of Venus. There are a few ways the author goes about doing this: telling us how venus couldve been like earth, how NASA has a few ideas on how to make the exploration safe and about the different technology they scientist would use to study venus.
Long ago venus couldve been considered another earth-like planet of life. in the text it states, " Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth". This would encourage any scientist to want to explore more into the planet to try and figure out what went wrong, even though it is close to the sun but still has earth like features, what is the problem? Venus still, to this day, has features of earth like mountains and valleys and rocky sediment, but is still not liveable on because of some conditions. In the end it could be like another planet we could visit because it is so close to earth, but we have to find some way to get there safely.
In order to do a successful research of venus, you have to first get there safely, and NASA has an idea to do that. The author introduces NASA's idea in paragraph 5 stating "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of
Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray." Just like our airplanes and jets, scientist would be able to float above the atmosphere of venus because of the risky temperatures and conditions. It would allow them to avoid unfiendly ground conditions and stay out of the way for anything to come. Even though it wouldn't protect you from every little hassle of Venus, the air pressure would still be close enough to that of earth and the conditions will still be survivable for humans.
Once you get there, you would need something to conduct your research or study with, so having durable equipment would help you get your job done. First of all, the author states in the text "Some siplified electronics made of silicone carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." This would allow scientist to conduct an expirement well enough to find out more about venus. They could use the electronics made of silicone carbide to help them make longer observations , than those of modern equipment that would melt rather quickly because of Venus's conditions. In adition to the silicone carbide, NASA has also been working on bringing back mechanical computers, used in WW II that use levers and gears to make calculations. Those computers are more resistant to heat and pressure.
And finally with the idea of how Venus could've been like earth, the different ways on how to make the exploration safe and the different technology that would be used to study venus, one can conclude that venus is not only worthy of a pursuit but is also a way of creating value and expansion. | 34
|
9136091 | There are positive and negatives to all things in life. Some things we can't stop from happening. One thing that is in our future is driverless cars. In the future more and more people will have this type of car. The reasons to allow driverless cars in the future are like a three-legged stool. I am for the driverless cars because it can prevent car crashes, you still have some control of the car, and you can accomplish tasks in the car.
The first leg on the the stool is it can prevent car crashes. In the passage it says, "Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash." Also in the passage it explains that there might be an aspect where the car can watch you. If the car can see you are texting it won't let you take over the car. This would reduce the amount of car crashes due to texting and driving. I also think that with the driverless car it would reduce the amount of drunk driving crashes. On the other hand, I can see how peope would be against this they may think it could cause more crashes. For example, what would happen if the car stopped working and didn't alert the driver. The driver may have to idea that the car stopped and easily drive off the road.
The second leg on the stool is you still have some control of the car. The passage says, " They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." In areas such as construction zones and accidents the car will alert you and you can take over. The car can alert you by having flashing lights on the windshield or vibrating your seat. I like to know I have some control of my vehicle. This way I know I can take over before it drives me into a ditch or a pond. I can see someone's view that is against this as why would I want a driverless car if I still might have to drive it. The car wouldn't be driverless if you have to drive through constuction zones. This could cause issue because people would want the car to be completely in control.
The third leg on the stool is you can accomplish tasks in the car. If you are running behind on getting something finished for work and you have a half and hour drive there that is a waste of time. With the driverless car you can get your work finished and still make it to work on time. Also, since the car is watching you if you recieve a text you can respond. I feel this will be much safer with all the drivers I have seen that text and drive. On the other hand, someone who is against the driverless car might feel this is unsafe. If the driverless car stops working and the driver is doing something else they won't have time to gain control of the car to stop from crashing.
There are positives and negatives to all things in life. Some things we can't stop from happening. The driverless cars are in our future. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan by 2020 plan to all have a driverless car according to the passage. The reasons to allow driverless cars in the future are like a three-legged stool. I am for the driverless cars because it can prevent car crashes, you still have some control of the car, and you can accomplish tasks in the car. This is how the reasons to allow driverless cars are like a three-legged stool. | 45
|
84c9a84 | Have you ever wondered what causes different forms on the surface of a planet? NASA has spotted a form that looks like a Egyptian Pharaoh, on the surface of Mars. Different forms on the surface of a planet is just a natural landform because, their is no life on any planet except for Earth, NASA does real reasearch, the theories are just statements that you can't depend on.
First of all, there is no life on the planet of Mars. For example, they would of seen life when they took the picture. Also, it states that it just looks like an unusual landform. Finally, Mars is to cold for any life because that is why the astronauts have to where suits.
Second, NASA does actual research. For example, NASA actually goes up and looks at it. Also, states that when they went up to the planet they snapped pictures of the "Face". Finally, the text stated that it was a huge rock formation that looked like a face.
Lastly, the people that making theories are not always true. For example, the text states that when NASA took the picture, they came up with a theory that claimed "it was too hazy to see any life." Also, it stated that they came up with theory that stated that NASA is hiding information about it looks like a bona fide which is evidence that there is life.
Some peopl might think that there is life on Mars because it looks like a bona fide. They are wrong because the picture that was taken didn't include any sign of life.
In conclusion, there is no life on Mars. The pictures didn't show anything about life. Also, the NASA actually goes up to Mars and checks it out. Finally, the theories that are made can't be depended on because they didn't check it out. There is no life on planet Mars. | 23
|
9a00c0a | What is the closest planet to Earth? The Evening Star give us the brightest light. The closest planet to Earth is Venus. As human studies, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system. Humans study more and more about Venus everyday.
The Evening Star give us the brightest light because it's too close to the Earth. Venus has more power of light than other planet. Mercury is closer to the sun but Venus can get more power than Mercury. Venus has has more power to gets the hotness. Venus is vantage point of Earth. The author says, "Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely," (paragraph 1).
As human studies, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system. As humans study, Venus's atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our town. When Venus has low power of hotness, the weather on Earth has changed. The author said, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus," (paragraph 3).
Today, solar systems are useful on Earth. Today, we're using computers, cell phone or tablat with solar. The author says, "By comparison, systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces," (paragraph 7). Humans are still working on Venus to get more powers, even though we got lots of power from Venus already.
Humans didn't want Venus's power at first because it's too hot and now, they want it because it's safe. In the paragraph 8, the last line, it said "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation". | 12
|
97fc71d | There are many advantages of limiting car usage. For example: when someone has a car, sometimes they are "always tense". Most people are much happier when they don't have to worry about a car. Some people might be conserned about the gas prices, and miles on a car. Germany-Residents, don't have cars, some places have bannded cars from there communitys. I think if there was less car usage it would help greenhouse gas emissons. President Obama's ambitious goal is to curb the United States of less car usage.
Most people would agree or say "if we don't have a car how are we supposed to get to places on time?" Well there is many other opitions like a train, bus, subway, taxi or even walking. Some people who are out of shape might need less car usage and more time walking, therefore that is another advantage to less car usage. How the world is today, some people might not be able to aford a vehicle. And some would rather pefer to walk or take a cab. Most of are world has centered itself around vehicles. making it almost impossible not to have one.
Althrough a lot of people would want a car if they had children, most kids like to walk or maybe ride a bike somewhere. A lot of students could take the bus and adults could grab a cab. I also think that if there was less car usage there would be less acidents. Young teenagers and young adults get into to much of a rush, and cause more acident but, if there was less car usage proublems like this would'nt happen so much. | 23
|
5f640dd | Driverless cars are coming. Now imagine a future where everyone has a driverless car. In some movies driverless cars are shown. In 2009, Google created a car that drove more than half a million miles without a crash. However, Google, BMW, and GM cars aren't truly driverless. The cars still need a human controling them. Their cars need features like a vibrating seat, flashing lights, or a camera that alerts the drivers when to take control of the vehicle.
One of the features that some driverless cars have is a vibrating seat. GM developed a seat that vibrates when the hevicle is in danger and it needs a human to take control of it. For example, When the car is backing into an object the drivers seat vibrates and a human has take control of it to prevent a crash.
Another feature that driverless cars have is flashing lights. Some cars have this feature. The lights start flashing when the car needs someone to take control of it. For example, In a workzone the car can't pass, so it needs someone to control it. The lights start flashing to alert the driver that it needs to control it in oder to pass.
The third feature that driverless cars will have is a camera. Manufactures are considering using cameras. Manufatures wants to use cameras to see if drivers are focused on the road. For example, While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver.
I acknowledge that some people don't want driverless cars. However, those who don't like the idea should stay away from driverl. ess cars and leave the concept to people that want it. Driverless cars are not for everyone. Driver less cars are for people that can aford it.
In the future manufacturers will create a car that will be fully driverless. Like Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to release driverless cars by 2020 Researches will go on and new techologies will be created in the future. | 12
|
91732ad | should we have less car usage in the U.S.? The answer is yes because it could stop alot of the pollution going into the atmosphere. This could help with the green house gases going into the ozone layer and harming the earth.
One reason that we should cut back on car use is because of the green house gases going into the air. In Europe passenger cars are why 12% of green house gases arer from there. But the U.S. is even more responsible for the woping 50% in somer areas here. So if you were to cut back here that would be a good thing so you can cut back on the pollution. I bet if you were to use bikes instead of cars it would cut back on the 50% of green house gases here. For example take a look at NewYorks bike-sharing program helped out the mobile world so think about it.
Another reason is a lot of people really like the fact that not having cars is a great factor to the earth. Just take a look in Germany in the town of VAUBAN residents of this town went from being minivan driving soccer moms to people who feel at ease because thw willingly gave up there cars. Which a lot of people cannot do just like that. 70% of the families in Vauban do not own cars and about 57% sold there cars just to move there which means that they all willfuly gave up there automobiles just to stay in that town and that has cut back on a lot of pollution in Europe. In the passage a women says "when i had a car i was always tense. I am much more happier this way."
so in conclusion, i belive that giving up your car to cut back on pollution just like they did in Europe is a great idea because quite frankly. I think we would be in a whole better situation if we did. This would mean a lot of the green house gases in the ozone now would not get added onto. so to me bike are a perfect way of doing this or even walking is a good substitution. So after i've explained everything are you in or out? | 23
|
9f4fbfa | The driveless cars are a good development because it could fundamentally change our world. The driveless cars would stop the driver from getting tired of driving around because the car drives itself. Also the positive turn of this is that the driver can take a break and admire their sorroundings. Including, the driveless car let's the driver take control whenever the driver wants. Another good thing about this car is that it lets the driver know what's ahead of the road for them so that they are aware of what's going on.
The driveless car lets the driver know when they have to take over by flashing lights in the windshield, driver's seat vibrating, sensors to make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel, or like Google's cars that tell you when so. Also, the driveless cars are in someway safer because drivers tend to fall asleep or let their minds wonder of, so by having the driveless car your making it safer for those around and even the people in the car.The driveless car is a good benifit to have because it's safe and it's an advantage for drivers. It's also a good for those who hate traveling in cars making it a new and exciting experience. | 12
|
3b7c88c | There's a Face on Mar's that some people threorise is am alien landmark. However, there's evidence supporting that it's just a natural landform. The Face is a natural landform because while the first picture was bluried the second was ten times sharper then the original, the photos are reported to be of a natural landform, scientist say it is a mesa (common in the western U.S).
As I stated before, scientist say the second photo is ten times sharper than the original photo. This means it was more accurate. The article showed the second picture to readers at the top third picture to the right. It shows what looks like, and is ,a natural landform. One scientist, Jim Garvin, compared it to a mesa. A mesa is commonly found in the "western area of the American West."
In conclusion, the Face is an all natural landform that formed on Mars. I said that it's natural because the photos (which are more accurate than before) are said to have a picture of an natural landform, which they do. The Face can't be a Martian relic as it is a mesa. If it was of Martian descent wouldn't it look more noticable and detailed? The Face is a natural landform because the first picture shown to the masses was bluried and unaccurate while the second was sharper and more accurate than the original, the second photos are reported to show a natural landform, and scientist say the Face is a landform not unsimilar to a mesa (which can be found in Western America). | 23
|
b6a7244 | Final:
I find I am against driverless cars because it's too risky to try out on the road. No car will ever be completely self-sufficient, which means humans must pay attention, but i believe even with all the alerts it won't be enough. We humans are unpredictable meaning who knows if we will be able to stay focused enough to know if when we need to take over. Google has had a self-drivng car since 2009, but has not been on sale yet, because it had some problems. I feel this will continue to go on, Tesla says they will have a self-driving car out this year, but I feel it will be pushed back because of some "minor" problems.
Some car companies are using vibrations or telling people directly when to take over, but it's still too unreliable. I also agree that people will get bored waiting for their turn to drive. To pass the time, some companies are planning on adding in-car entertainment. This is a huge distraction and could probably lead to a crash. There are still some key issues that need to be worked out like, if the technology fails and someone's injured, who's at fault.
Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that these problems will be resolved, but what if they're not! It's too much of a risk to just assume that these problems will be fixed. i also believe we shouldn't be wasting our time right now on driverless cars, when we have bigger car problems going on currently. We need to create cars that have cameras, so then people can get caught being on their phones. We need cars that are more fuel efficient because our air isn't getting any cleaner, and people aren't going to stop driving. Having a driverless car is a luxury and is extremely not necessary right now at all! | 23
|
ab71e49 | Most people who reach the age of 16 are elated to be able to learn how to drive. When they reach that point in their lives, they feel independent, responsible. They would not like to have that priviledge taken away from them. In fact, though most teens start to question authority more around the age of 16, they would do anything to stay out of trouble and would never risk the chance of having their driving priviledge revoked. Driverless cars would eliminate the entire experience of learning how to drive and all the pleasure one feels from it.
Driverless cars are an brilliant idea and would reduce the number of casualties and deaths that are caused by car accidents every year.
They would also, however, bring up new problems that would need to be solved. Not everyone would be able to afford a driverless car, as they would no doubt be extremely expensive, therefor not everyone would have one. If there were to be a mix of car types on the road, there would be the issue of accidents caused by cars with drivers. Would the person with the driverless car be considered faultless everytime just because it is assumed that the driverless car has everything under control? Would the person driving their own car be to blame because they should be responsible enough to watch where they are going and navigate the roads safely?
Another issue that would arise would be NASCAR. If driverless cars became the norm, what would be the point of racecars? Many people would lose their jobs because they had only worked in one position for a long period of time. The men and women in the pit stops would lose their jobs, as well as the drivers themselves. Companies that are funded by NASCAR would be in trouble as well because who would they have to help them out?
Driverless cars would eliminate some jobs, but also create some others. Companies that make computer-driven cars would have a ton of business, therefor increasing the employment rates. That also increases the chance of theft by the companies' employees. With the new demand of different, more expensive parts, employees would more than likely be tempted to steal from one company to help another if it meant a larger paycheck. Which ever company was doing the best would have to be extremely careful and might even have to hirer extra security to protect themselves and their products.
Driverless cars would both solve and cause problems in the future, should they become the norm. If not everyone could afford the new, expensive cars, who would be blamed for the car accidents that are bound to happen? Sports that include car racing, such as NASCAR, would be eliminated and thousands of people would be left without jobs and, potentially, on the streets. Though the new cars would create new jobs as well, they would also cause new thefts by employees in companies to better the flow of there income. Driverless cars would cause more problems than they would be worth in the long run. | 23
|
c496be4 | I think that the face on mars is just a nautral landform because the text states that few scientists believed it was an alien artifact. Also, the passage says that on April 5, 1998 when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time and the team snapped a picture, revealing that it was just a landform. Even though the team did this, people still beleive that it was a face. The Face of Marshad become a very big thing for pop culture. It was on TV, was in books, and on the radio.
We see things in everyday life like clouds. They remind us of animals, objects, maybe even memories. I cannot make a conclusion and say that cloud is a bunny and think that one day a bunny was in the cloud and it's face started to form. It is based on your perspective. To me, it looks like a natural landform on Mars but maybe to other people it looks like some type of ancient face. If people think it is an ancient face then people are going to ask questions then it creates an even bigger mystery. This was just coencidence. So, that is why I think that the creation on Mars is just a natural landform. | 12
|
e4808ce | The "Face" on mars was not created bye Alians. The face on mars is just a natural landingform, and was not reayed by Alians. April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Sureveyor flew over cydonia for the first time Michael Malin and is MOC tean snaped a picture ten times sharper than the original viking photo. After that thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting for the image to appere, when finally when the first image appeared on a JPL web site, revealing a natrual landing form. There was no Alian monument after all.
If the "face" was created by an Alian/Anlians there would be trakings of them and all that and it was really hard to see because it was winter at the time. They dont pass the unknown figure very offten, but when they did they payed really close attintion to the figure. They took more pictures to discover them. They still found know tracings or sighs that alians made this.
What the picture really showes is the Martiam equivalent of a butte or mesa- landingforms common around American West. "Its a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same hight and the Face on Mars." | 12
|
7a7e7bb | The Face on Mars was at first just a shadowy likeness of a human face. Yet, as we focused more and more into the Face the more superficial it became. Is it a Martian? Is there life on Mars?
Well, from the evidence given, it is very likely that the superstions are false, and the Face is just a landform.
The Face was captured again on April 5, 1998 by the MOC which gave a sharper photo. That alone was enough proof to show that the Face is just a landform. Even though it was very cloudy around Mars around that time, it would still be difficult to pass over the Face. The MOC scans over the planet with narrow 2.5 km-wide strips which would make it very hard to miss over the Face.
Lastly on April 8, 2001 NASA captured an extraordinarry photo of the Face. It was a cloudless, summer day which squelched all objections of it being too cloudy around Cydonia to capture a good photo. Each pixel in the photo spans 1.56 meters, whereas the best photo in 1976 only had 43 meters per pixel. The photo was so spectacular that you could zoom in 3 times the pixels size, so even if there were life, small shacks, or pyramids on Mars, you'd be able to see them.
In conclusion, the Face on Mars is just a landform. the 2001 photo gives enough evidence that even if there were life or monuments on Mars you would be able to see them. The photo in 1998 was also a good photo, so good that it would be hard to even miss over the Face. Also, even if there were life on Mars NASA would have no reason to hide it, it would help their company more than it would be a detriment to it. The article states, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or messa--landforms common around the American West." | 23
|
583a1a6 | Throughout the years, humans have always had to get from point A to point B. To make this easier they use cars. But with air pollution and traffic being an issue in most countries, mayors are deciding to put down the car keys and pick up their walking shoes.
To begin with, air pollution is becoming a big issue on the Earth. Greenhouse gases are being released and most of them come from cars alone. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe...and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States" (Section 1, Paragraph 5). Cars and trucks are causing our Earth, our home, to waste away because of the gases they give out. If more people decided to walk to where they need to go instead of driving, then it would reduce the gases that cars and trucks give out. With more people walking rather than driving, it would make the air more clean and the Earth a better place to live.
Further more, another reason people should decide to put down their car keys is because of the traffic that cars cause. Why France was trying to get rid of smog, they banned people from using their cars. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog" (Section 2, Paragraph 14). If more people walked or used public transportation rather than their own cars, traffic jams would decrese and also crashes. When people drive their own cars they tend to lose focus and they might hit someone. With less people driving then there would be less deaths from car accidents. Putting down your keys and walking or using public transportation, would be beneficial to not only you but also everyone else too.
In conclusion, people rely on cars every day of their lives. To get you to where you need to go, but if we continue to use cars every day and destroy the Earth then there will be no where for us to go in the future. Polluting the air and causing car accidents and deaths is not what we need to be doing. Put the keys down, and walk! | 34
|
5f6ce63 | Do you want to become a hero someday? Ever wonder if people need help in diffrent countries? If so,you should probably join the "UNRRA" (the United States Relief and Rehabilitation Administration),people who hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses,young cows,and mules that were shipped over seas.
I think people should join the program becuase it takes you places all over the world and it takes you to places you probably never been or known of before. I know this becuase in the passage it states that both boys Luke,and Don had traveled all over the world. It states that they traveled to Europe and crossed the Pacific Ocean twice.
Another reason,is that goes and helps people recover from the ruins of World War II.I know this becuase in the passage it states that Don and Luke traveled to help people recover from the ruins of World War II in Europe,to help them with food supplies,animals,and much more.
If I was eligitable to go,I would go becuase i like to help people. To put a smile on their faces. I hope you join. | 12
|
d3c55a0 | For many years, people have been debating whether or not Mars has life forms living on it. In 1976, NASA came across a strange image. On the side of Mars, there seemed to be a landform that looked like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Many people believed this to be a sign of life on Mars, but it really is not.
If the image from Mars did infact prove that there is life on Mars, NASA would benefit greatly. "Some people think that the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars---evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." Why would NASA lie about this if telling the truth meant more funding?
NASA has tried over and over again to prove that the Face is just a landform; we just won't listen. "We felt this was important to taxpayers,' explained Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program. 'We photographed the Face as soon as we could get a good shot at it."
The image is showing us that there is a butte on Mars, of which scientists have made many comparisons to the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
Of course there might be life on Mars, but there's no way to know for sure. Blaming NASA for lying about the discovery of "aliens" is just simply illogical. NASA is an organization that explores space and everything in it, hoping to find something they can share with the world. The Face may be a neat discovery to show your kids one day, but it is definately not a sure sign of life on Mars.
People need to stop thinking that they know more than the professionals. NASA is an organized group of scientists who know more about space and science than the common person. They have classified the Face as nothing more than a butte, and it's time that we except that. In the future alien lifeforms may be discovered on Mars; that day is just not in 1976. | 23
|
0760842 | Many people think or believe that they should get rid of the Electoral College vote for the president. Well in my opinion I believe they should not keep it because why do we even need them for? We have the people of the US. They can vote for a president, that's why the Constitution was written, to gives us the rights, freedom of speech, the right to vote. Why else would we have that if our vote won't really matter.
They should get rid of the Electoral College Vote because we already have many people voting for the president. We don't really need many people just to choose one man or woman to lead the country. They can just count how many citizens voted for a president and the one who has more voters is the winner. If it ends up as a tie, then just let the memebers of the House of Represenatives vote. Or at least let the popular vote decide who the president will be.
Having the Electoral College vote is useless, because they just vote for a for a slate of electors, who in turn will elect the president. It just adds more steps to elect the president. They should just get rid of it and keep the popular vote for the president of the United States. Let the qualified citizens vote who they want to be the president. It'd make more sense, because they just vote for someone who is not holding office, anyone. I say get rid of it so that we don't get a "disaster factor" anymore. That 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in the century. This electoral college vote is unfair , outdated, and irrational. its unfair because of the winner-take-all system.
However, many people may disagree. They belive that we should keep the electoral college vote. There's five reasons of why they think we should keep this type of method of choosing the President. The first reason is the certainty of outcome. A dispute over the outcome of the Electoral College vote is less likely to happen than a dispute over the popular vote. The second reason is everyone's president. It requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal and no region has enough electoral votes to elect for a president. The third reason is the swing states. The unfair method of winner-takes-all electoral votes induces the candidates and focuses on the voters in toss-up states whom more likely pay close attention to the campaign. The fourth reason is the big states. Electoral College restores some weight in the political balance by letting a large state get more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign than a small state does. And the fifth reason is to avoid run-off elections. It avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate recieves a majority of the votes cast.
So in conclusion they should get rid of the electoral college vote because its unfair to the small states. Knowing that their vote will not have any effect, they have no reason to pay attention to the campaign. They can just let the popular vote decide or the House of Representatives. Bob Dole was right. Lets get rid of the electoral college vote. Mostly get rid of it because its unfair to some states or people. Its is really an irrational way to settle on an agreement of who the president may be. And yes is may have less disputes over the outcome but it better to have some dispurtes over it so we elect the correct president and see what all their qualities may be. In my opinion I believe we should abolish the electoral college. | 23
|
bf39c86 | Driverless cars are the future of the world. The plan is to have cars that drive themselves by 2020, but do we want this? No, let me give you my opinion on why not.
I dont think driverless cars should be manufactured and produced and put on the streets. First off I don't like the idea of a vehicle that drives itself on its own, "selfaware technology" makes me uncomfortable. Second, It's a very lazy thing to create seeing America the way it is now, Our health definetly won't get any better and it says that they aren't completly automated yet and can still be driven by humans around construction sites and other hazardous material in the road. There is also the question of what the driver would be doing behind the wheel of the car while the car is driving. Watching the road? What if someone were to fall asleep while the car was driving itself?
In conclusion would making these types of cars really be worth it? and if so how would they be able to work around all of the errors of a human operator? How would they pay for all of it with us being as far in debt as we are? The questions remain. | 12
|
3393759 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents to humans that even get near the planet. Even with the dangers that are poised against those who would go near Venus, there is still intrigue in the planet from our simple human nature, the opporatunity of studing an Earth like planet besides our own, and the fact that Venus is so close to Earth.
The main reason of studying the planet Venus is capitalized by the article and the author in this quote "Often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." The Author also simply puts in the article that humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on Venus all unmanned.
Another reason for the intrigue in studing Venus is our simple human nature. In another quote by the author and in the article "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus beceause it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." the author gives us a reason and it's a reason that makes logical sense. The landscape of Venus is also described in the article as Earth like.
The author suggested studying Venus would be a wirthy pursuit despite the dangers. I say they actually supported their idea thoroughly in the end. There also seems to be no error in the logic of the author either. | 12
|
df8563d | The author starts off by talking about how Venus is the closest planet to earth. Although Earth has made it a challening place to examine more closely. But since Venus is right around the corner,they have sent numerous spacecrafts. The spacecrafts failed to survive the landing for more than a few hours. In the article it says " Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging plant for humans to study despite its proximity to us" This shows how challening it is. The author goes on to say how life is on venus in the article it says " clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere". The article also says ' surface temperatures average over 800 degrees". This shows how author decribes life on Venus. The author then talks about how astronomers still want to know more about Venus. In the article it says " Astronmers are fanscinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system". This shows why atronomers are drawn to Venus. The author talks about how it is human curiosity. In the article it says " our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innvation'. This shows that even if Venus is dangerous they still want to travel and know more about this plant. | 12
|
7a1fe31 | There are many advantages of limiting car usage. Elisabeth Rosenthal writes "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" to show that limiting car usage helps to "reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes..." Their goal is to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases being released into our atmosphere because it is destroying Earth. The gases are destroying the ozone layer drastically, and if this continues Earth will be gone. She also wrote "The End of Car Culture" explaining that the number of cars bought has reduced, bu in reality it is a good thing because it reduces the amount of pollution in the air, and money could be used on something more productive. Cars have not been the main priority of in America. People began to carpool, ride bikes, ride the bus, etc. This will "save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety." Additionally, Robert Duffer writes "Paris bans driving due to fog" explaining how "Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals..." In Paris, many people are using cars, and they release the bad smoke into the atmosphere. By all the gases being combined together, it creates smog which is deadly. It can cause many health problems to humanlife and the nature. Another article to support that it is better off to limit car usage is "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky. Selsky quotes a business man Carlos Arturo, "'It's a good oppurtunity to take away stree and lower air pollution.'" Even citizens agree that it is necessary for people to limit how much they drive because it streeses people out. They don't have to worry about spending a drastic amount of money on gas, or repairing the car. It is easier just to ride a bike which helps you save money, and even get a good execrise. It also limits air pollution because less cars are being driven and not alot of harmful gases are being released. Overall, there are benefits in not having a car. | 23
|
8a3e1c0 | Driverless cars. What are they? They are the future altohugh no one knows that 100% I believe that they are becasue as my generation and as the next generation grows sure we are all verry smart but we dont use our potential anymore at all. For example this is one of the esiest test and yet some people still fail it. How I do not know the answer to that. Anyways my point is that we are lazy really lazy and we want people/ AI's to do our jobs and objectives for us so we dont have to put in any work. Has it always been this way? sometimes I ask myself this question and no it hasent. I have whitnessed many things in my lifetime and I have done a lot in my lifetime. Personaly the google car is great I have seen them and many poeple I know have tested them, But what have we learned about evolution its good and bad well just think of the whole Jurasic Park story the pople want more they get more and then they somehow mess it up. There are many people who belive it is good and then there are the ones who think it is bad I personaly think it is a step in the wrong way, becasue it makes us worse as a human race. Sure not everyone would be able to afford one but eventualy they will and we will al be like the movie Walle have you seen that movie its messed up a bunch of overweight people in a space ship probably becasue they had self driving cars lets be real. All jokes aside we could and it is verry likely to end up like that. Not just from self driving cars but also from thinks that will come after that maybe next we will have self flying planes and that would put me ou tof my job of being a pilot. Just think of how many kids dreams are being crushed that want to be drivers for people they can't do that anymore because all the cars will be driving themselvse. Yea think about all the little kids dreams you are crushing. Also what would happen to insurance on cars if you mess up now is it your fault or the cars fault and then in turn the manufactures fault. This was what paragraph nine was about. This would crush our economy, sure people would be buying the car-> Great for the company-> Not great for jobs. maybe you could tell those insurance companies and drivers "Hey since we took your job and messed up your whole life lets put you in a factory where you can build more cars like the ones that ohh wait rememer those the ones that TOOK YOUR JOB" yea happy ending right? People would get payed a lot less and if google was the only one who released it then that is called a monopaly yes you thinking like the game yea you know where you try to buy out basicaly the whole economy just for one thing and you better hope you dont land on the go to jail spot becasue if you do your SOL (well im sure you know what that means). i hope i made someone laugh not its not the best essay but you have gottent this far and i hope you laughed at least a little. "Ohh but wait theres more for only $4.99 you could own your verry own self driving car and (wait for it) and free airfreshener" well thats dandy lets buy one i got to get that google airfreshener it probably smells amazing. No it doesnt you know why because it doesnt exist. probably does honestly. So there are two ways you can go about this the world can get stupider and stupider with this evolution and the people in the world its like a circus not good at all but then AI would control the world ohh thats fine lets just you know give our nukes to computer and hope that it doesnt get mad at us and blow us up. see then the AI would hold the most power in the world the president would be like one atom in sometihng that has 100,000,000 atoms thats like a fly on a winsheild its powerless. You know you shouldnt kill flys on winsheilds you know why? hmm ill tell you later you just have to keep reading. this is probably a pain for you to read. But this is very well what could happen in not my lifetime nor yours becasue your obviosuly older than me whoever is grading this paper. Im guessing about a few generations that self driving cars will be the norm maybe my lifetime probably not thought hmm I dont know.
Ohh yes that was just my introduction are you read for the next two paragraphs that you have to read. Well first guess what this one is also wabout self driving cars but it is about there saftey (with more jokes). Why does the car cross the road??? ... To get to the other side I know pretty good I came up with that one myself. Ohh wait they die thats what happends when you kill flys on the winsheild the fly dies after it cries and tries to synthisize. you know as a human you can control that, but as a car that is opperated by an AI it wouldnt know if you kiled the fly or not it could just turn on the wippers and gone that fly is. Also the person is at risk if the car messes up and your not paying attention then waht happens you could get hurt really badly and whoes fault is it then how do you prove in court that the car crashed not you or what if the car wanted to crash becasue it didnt like you and you treated it poorly. Also whay happens if you are speeding and then the cop pulls you over and says sir do you know how fast you were going and you so no my car was driving itself sorry sir. Then is it your fault or the cars.
In the end it all boils down to a few things you know after it evaporates. you have you and your car and its your choice in the end. | 12
|
784ce74 | In the artical Making Mona Lisa Smile the author is describing how a new technology called the Factial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotiolns. No I don't think that using a computer will identify how a person is feeling and what there mood Is for the day. And I say this because what if they not really feeling that way what If they computer is guessing what thart person is really feeling. Like how would you even calculate what the percentage is and how would you even know what number to caculate. Usually how we tell If someone we know Is down Is by there face and you can tell If something happened or If they ae just tired. There is really no need for a computer to try to tell If someone is sad , happy, or mad It's all about your face expression and the way they walk and carry themselfes. When you look back at the text you can see that a classroom computer could recongize when a student is being confused or bored. You really can't though yes it's possible but for now you can't really try to relate to the passage and having computers read your mood and thoughts and feelings. This Is my reason why computers doesnt read minds and thoughts. | 12
|
dc6ca51 | Lukes point of vew is that Luke is trying to get people to partisapatein the seagoing cowboys program. it would be a good thing because people get to see the sea. And geting to be able to see the sea is a one in a life time chance because you may not be able to get anouther chance to go in the sea on a boat. anouther thing that would be cool to see is the world war ll just got over and you could see the boats and all the debre that the world war left behind.
Some people may get scared because they are in the middel of the sea and they lile to be with there famielys at night so the familys can keep them safe.
some people might think that when you are in the middel of the sea you are risking your life and you should not risk your life to go at sea.
The trip is much more than just any adernarry trip the trip will open up the world to you or any person that might go on this wonder full trip to go see what the sea looks like.
Anouther thinn is that all the money that you spend to go on the trip goes to the people that need the money the most will reseve the money. | 12
|
d2f90b5 | There is diffren't arguments about the Face spotted on Mars. Some believe it is an alien artifact, and some believe it is just rocks. I'm here to tell you it it just rocks. So, there is nothing to worry about. If you don't believe me, just keep reading... and you will soon learn it is just your imagination. But some people probably never will learn. Till then, just read this... Maybe I will change your mind if you really believe it is a face. Or maybe I won't. Let's see what you choose.
First, it just your eyes messing with you! Your eyes can play tricks on you and make you see things that are not really there. This is just rocks oddly placed and the rocks have shadows. That it all your seeing. If it were really a so called "face" on Mars, that would mean there would have to be life on Mars before. Have they proven life on Mars? They only found traces of water in the past. So, there could have been life on mars, but we haven't found anything besides this Face. Yes, if we found more ''faces'' we could consider it. But, we haven't, and there isnt enough evidence to support it.
Also, over the past 25 years... we've seen the Face everywhere in papers.
This could all be a scam, people are just trying to get people intrested in Mars more. There is always false advertisment in commercials, news articles, ect. This is just another one of those! We would have found something out in 25 years. And what do you know? Nothing. All there is, is a picture. They even took a picture a second time and still found nothing,said it was just a natural landform. So, there is NOTHING to worry about.
Say this is a alien artifact... Do you have anything else besides the Face that they've? Are aliens even REAL?? Nobody really knows because there is only skepitics. Let's be honest about this, it's NASA. There are very intelligent people there. I'm sure the best of the best. They wouldn't lie about some rocks would they? No... but people believe what they choose. People's eyes see what they want to see. Hear what they want to hear, no matter what the truth is. If you were to ask anyone about the face being an alien artifact or it just being a natural landform, not everyone would agree.
All of the rocks could have moved over time and made the Face. Honestly, your eyes are just playing tricks with you. They are showing you something that isnt there. It is only shadows. Nothing else. Is it odd it is shaped to look like a face? Of course yes. This is all like ''Big Foot'' people are just making up stories. And seeing a tree but they think it is Big Foot's shadow. Your going to soon grow out of it and come to your senses. That it is just a natural landform. Not a face or alien artifact. IF they actually find evidence... more then just some pictures. Actual proof... maybe, things will be differen't sure. Till then, just use your logic. Do you really think it is something more then rocks?
I hope I've at least made you consider that the face is a landform. If I didn't... well maybe no one will. But I know what I believe is true. IT IS JUST A LANDFORM. And until you give ME evidence to your side of the story. You can't change my mind either. Fair enough, right?
I rest my case. | 23
|
77fa317 | Dear state senator
I think having popular votes would be better 3 reason why I say this is because Electoral Colleges has selection of electors witch makings them vote for the President/Vice President. The second reason why i pick popular is because when it is Electoral Colleges voters vote not for president but for slate of electors and thats who picks the president. The last reason why we should vote by popular is because Electoral College is unfair.
To start off with why we should have popular votes is because Electoral Colleges process consists the selection of the electors and has a meeting with the electors where they vote for the President and Vice president. Electoral Collegeonly consists of 538 electors but majority of 270 is required to elect the President.
Another reson why i picked popular voting is because with popular votes the citizens are voting for who they want to be their President and who they want to be their Vice President but in Electoral College electors pick and vote for who they think would be the best President for instance if you lived in Texas and want to vote for John Kelly you would have to vote for slate 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kelly in Electoral College but in popular voting you could vote for anyone you wanted to and not someone who pledged that person.
The third reason why popular voting would be better is because Electoral College was unfair, outdated, and irrational and had lack of democratic and is also a turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their states like them knowingtheir votes will have no effect witch makes them pay less attention to Electoral College voting.
This is all the reason why the state senator should choose populae voting over Electoral College voting. | 23
|
f3d9d49 | Why exactlly should one spend there time in the Seagoing Cowboy program? Being in the Seagoing Cowboy program is a progam you should participate in. Just think about the many horses and cows that are harmed and need our after help after a war. This experience is a great one and you should try it.
Traveling is a big part of this amazing program, you get to see so many many historic sites and arcitecture. Being able to cross the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean by boat is pretty cool. One of the times this was used was in 1945 after World War II ended in Europe. Also in 1945 the Seagoing Cowboys helped after the Pacific War had ended.
After world War II ended many countries were ruined to help fix this 44 nations joined together to form the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). This is also a very good way to help in a fun way. The Seagoing Cowboy program saves many animals who would have else not made it through that deadly war or natural disaster. This is the program made for people who love animals. There are always cows or horses on board that are being rescued.
There is always work to be done as well. So, if your strong and like to work that could be a plus. Haybales and grain always need brought up from lower holds of the ship. Stalls always need cleaned and there is always work to be done. Sometimes you can catch a break on the way to another port and then you can relax.
So why should you join the Seagoing Cowboy program? Well for one reason, your helping so many animals and people too. There is always animals that need our help because well, animals can not talk for themselves so we have to be there for them. | 23
|
353f9af | As crazy as living without a car sounds, more and more people are doing it. One popular reason for it is for a healthier and happier lifestyle. In Elisabeth Rosenthal's short story titled In
German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars
Heidrun Walter reports "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Her and many others like her in the town of Vauban, Germany have experienced the difference and felt stress go away. The city has banned driveways and home garages, encourging the rule of living "car-free." The people rely on public transit, bicycles and their own two legs. While many people are stressing to get a car, the people of the town feel stressed if they have a car. Over half the population sold their cars to move there, and don't regret a thing. In the article titled
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota , Andrew Selsky quotes Carlos Arturo Plaza as saying "It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress" as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife.
Also Carlos Arturo Plaza goes on to say "[it's a good oppurtinity to] lower air pollution." People are realizing how many pollutants that cars emitt into the atmosphere. One example place is Paris, known for their terrible smog, has finally done something to clean it up. Robert Duffer wrote in
Paris bans driving due to smog
"After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." The law stated even numbered license plates couldn't drive one day, and the other, odd liscense plates couldn't. A little thing like this had a big effect. Duffer then reported "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog." Elizabeth Rosenthal in the aritcle
The End of Car Culture showed the idea " if [these] patterns persists...it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions." Americans are partically to blame for pollution. Our need for the newest, biggest, best things, has come at a cost, and more than money. Green-house gases are stacking up, and we have to take a stand some time. Rosenthal goes on to describe political leaders are working to fix this too, "President Obama's abitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions [were] unveiled last week."
In places already practicing the no car rule, environments have improved; more than pollution wise. Andrew Selsky reported of "the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths" and "uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks." These two additions of Bogota, Colombia have inspired many people to turn in their keys, and take a hike instead. Not only have these changes made people more happy, but it makes their city more beautiful and they are starting to get outdoors and see it. The author reports that "municipal authorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event [car-free day] and were enthuriastic," amung the people visiting was the Mayor of Paraguay's capital city. When more people see the effects, they want to do the same thing. Columbia's one day event has brought about much talk in neighboring towns and even "two other Colombian cities, Calli and Valledupar, joined the event."
On the other side of the argument, many car industries are trying to compete with these new ideas and technology. Rosenthal quotes in
The End Of Car Culture
"But it could have negative implications for the car industry. Indeed, companies like Ford and Mercedes are already rebranding themselves "mobility" companies with broader product range beyond the personal vehicle" As humans advance into the ideas of walking, biking, or taking public transportation, car companies strive to become known for things other than cars. They want to be able to sell you things still, even if you don't want or need a car. Later she writes how Bill Ford proposed the fresh idea at the Mobile World Congress that car dealers should "partner with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which 'pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety." This long quote simply means having all forms of transportion and the new technology in communications to be one, for the better of the people.
With or without cars, we all are always on the move. Some cities have adapted new ideas to get from place to place, or simply old ideas, being put back into action. Although Henry Ford would probably be dissapointed at his invention being faded out, Mother Nature would be pleased of us taking care of Earth. We never know what the future holds, but we do know, we'll always only have one home, so we better take care of it. | 45
|