Tuesday, February 13, 2007


I have successfully completed my English 10 wiki.

My word is RECUR and can be found in the Unit 15-16 section.

Monday, February 12, 2007

Day 5


An abundance of scientists are currently stating that global warming is a serious issue that needs to be addressed immediately. However I disagree and believe that it is merely a natural change in the stage of the globe. I will be taking on the role of naysayer and be protesting the continuation of the issue within the senate committee.


I will be making a number of points that will give proof to my current standpoint.I will also be stating my opinion along with the evidence given. In order to make it more simple I will be presenting the evidence in bullet form at first and than editing it into paragraph form at a later point.


  1. Natural Change In Amount of Greenhouse Gases - The U.S environmental protection agency states that multiple changes have occurred previously that are much worse than the current state of our climate today. The cause of these includes volcanic eruptions, earths orbit and changes in the suns intensity. All of these changes have prominent effects that have been present throughout history. They include the 'mini ice age' between 1500 and 1850 and the abnormal warmth between 900 and 1300 in parts of Europe and most likely the rest of the world. With this evidence present I personally am under the assumption that this is yet another less drastic fluctuation in the climate and that it is not caused by humans.
  2. Global Cooling Was Once an Alleged Issue - According to an October 23, 2006 edition of Newsweek scientists were previously worried about another phenomenon as a result of pollution from humans. This however was different. Scientists were worried about a possible extreme cool as a result of the pollution in the air. They thought that tiny particles of pollution from things such as aerosol cans would fill the air and reflect sunlight, dramatically cooling the earth. This issue, however absurd today was considered to be a highly advanced theory that was executed with utmost precision that would not be possible without the use of new technologies of the time. There is a "deja vu" effect present in the current attitude towards global warming today. Scientist say that the theory's from the 1970's are out of date and inaccurate. However if each theory changes as soon as new technology is present in combination with the extreme technological advances occurring so quickly at this point in time how do we know which theory to believe. It is my opinion that global "warming" like cooling is merely a fad of the time and has just as much bearing as global "cooling" had 30 years ago.
  3. Warmer Climate Is Not A Negative Thing - According to a report given by Thomas Moore of Standford University global warmth has typically proven to create more abundant and prosperous lives for the inhabitants of that era. Warmth leads to a number of things including longer lives, better nutrition and heightened growth rates in people. Although I am not necessarily stating that global warming is true I am implying that the natural increase in warmth during our time is not something to take in a bad way and it is not necessary to make negative assumptions about our climates current state. Without natural climate fluctuations humans would not have the capability to recover from the natural destruction that the earth has in store as well.
  4. Scientist Have Not Presented Any Specific Evidence Towards Global Warmings Negative Effects - As we have most recently learned in class when you establish a problem you must also find evidence and than later a solution. The scientific community has failed to do either. Global warming is merely a hypothesis that has no serious backing and is only supported by vague evidence. No matter how many sets of statistics and graphs they present there is never strong enough statistics to prove our current climate changes are unlike the many others that have been prominent throughout history (see - "little ice age"). And also the solution, scientists are merely saying that we need to stop what we are doing and make changes, however large or small they are too broad to establish any progress stemming from them. Scientists are merely doing what is necessary to create success within their field and establish a necessity for their research and development of new products and theory's.


  • Need for Worry - Without things such as global warming to worry about and establish as an issue the public does not find it necessary for the government or other agencies to have control over certain assets.
  • Paycheck - Scientists find it necessary to make their hypothesis more compelling to the public in order to receive more funding for research and a steady job or subject of study.
  • Political Power - Some parties and government groups such as the "green party" and "environmental" agencies base their entire reason for existence on topics surrounding global warming. Without a problem present the groups themselves have no reason to exist.


I am not implying that a healthier environment is not a positive thing, I am just stating that global warming is not the reason to do so. It is common sense that the more pollution in the air or chemicals put out each year have a negative effect on the environment. However that does not mean that humans, over such a short period of time have created the horrible and drastic negative effects that scientists are establishing. Global warming is not a problem that deserves the attention of a national committee or something that should be addressed by congress, it is merely a fad much like others present in many different generations that has no bearing on the current or future state of society.

Thursday, February 8, 2007

Day 3


There is a problem with children at Tartan High School and multiple effects of it are visible. Children are constantly bickering to teachers, sleeping in class and always sick to school. The cause of this behavior is simple and avoidable, it is lack of good nutrition. This problem is very evident, especially in the food served at in the cafeteria. Disgustingly large amounts of fattening fries, burgers, cheese curds etc. are seen piled on to nearly every students plate along with fattening and sugar ridden beverages as well.


When questioning 10 students randomly 8 of them responded saying that they ingested something deep fried as a main course at least 4 days a week. Startling as this seems it is very true, one has to extensively scan the lunch room in order to pick out someone without fries filling over half of their tray. Although there there is adequate food it is more expensive and sub-par with it being nearly impossible to distinguish the flavor and look of a cantaloupe to that of a watermelon.


There are numerous factors that contribute to the lack of nutrition in the school system. First of all is expense, purchasing a 1 cup portion of soup costs $1.75 while next to it the fries are a mere .75$. Another factor would be flavor which is in inadequate and dull in food that is typically exotic, tasteful and healthy with fries seeming to be a much more enjoyable choice.


My proposed solution is simple and money smart. First of all have a non-biased board rate all food in the cafeteria as either healthy or non, than instill a type of "tax" of 50% on all food rated as unhealthy. This creates a economic necessity for students to purchase the more healthy and helpful foods and spend less often on the unhealthy ones. Also all of the money earned should be put towards either a health committee focused on assisting in educating students on healthy food choices or on directly lowering the price of healthier foods. Hopefully this will create a positive feedback in the attitudes, grades, and attentiveness of students as a whole.

Monday, February 5, 2007

Day 1

Families have very little time to spend with each other. With the constant barrage of technology, activities and work it is very rare to have adequate time to spend with each other. And when you finally have that chance the possibility of finding an activity that everyone can agree on is even more rare. Families are becoming more diverse, both in age and customs and this combination makes it harder to find something in common with one another. With all this in mind you have to consider the possibility that family are slowly spreading farther apart and a change in the way time is spent together must change as well. Maybe if families set aside time and activities on a regular basis and compromise on activities than the process would go along more smoothly and the necessary bond between family members would remain strong.