Thursday, May 1, 2008

Global Climate Change

First off I am sure you are unaware that even though universally it is called global warming, the correct term is global climate change.
Second I will be using this data that i collected in class tomorrow
Third- there is Global Climate Change and I have no idea how you can be so blind
Forth- see you all in class tomorrow
1. Astronomical theory of climate change.
· Which is the tilt of the earth relative to its plane of travel about the sun is what causes seasons. The theory that the poles will switch and winter will become summer and vice versa.
· This ice age theory is expected to occur in the next 50,000 - 100,000 years

1. Clean Air Act
· is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this law authorizes EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants.
2. Clean Water Act (CWA)
· establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.
3. Atomic Energy Act
· utilization of atomic energy for peaceful purposes to the maximum extent consistent with the common defense and security and with the health and safety of the public… meaning- to develop guidance for federal and state agencies containing recommendations for their use in developing radiation protection requirements.

· Climate is the average pattern of weather over the long term. The earth’s climate has warmed and cooled for millions of years, since long before we appeared on the scene. There’s no doubt that the climate is growing warmer currently; indications of that change are all around us.
· The oceans, which cover more than 70% of the earth’s surface, play a fundamental and complex role in regulating climate. The oceans absorb huge amounts of solar energy; ocean currents transport this heat from the equator toward the Poles. In the past, long-term, natural oscillations in the oceans’ capacity to store and transport heat have led to global temperature changes. Ability to tell data through satellite measurements of microwave energy emitted by ocean waters. Microwave energy—like visible light and infrared radiation—is a form of electromagnetic radiation.
· Changes in climate dramatically alter the planet’s snow- and ice-covered cryosphere. With variations in the earth’s temperature, thousands of square miles of snow and ice can accumulate or melt. Changes in snow and ice cover, in turn, affect air temperature, sea level, ocean currents, and storm patterns. Snow and ice help keep the earth cool by reflecting between 60% and 90% of the solar energy that shines on them back into space. Reduction of snow cover and sea ice may lead to increased warming, as more solar energy is absorbed.
· Many species inhabit precisely bounded ecological niches, and even small changes in climate may cause fundamental disruptions in habitat or food availability. In the past, animals could respond to these pressures by moving from one place to another. Today, however, land development has constrained and fragmented ranges and travel routes, making species migration in response to climate change much more difficult. Moreover, loss of key predator or prey species may affect the life cycles of other organisms in the food chain.
· Interpreting past and present climate data is difficult, but predicting future climate change—and its possible effects—is even more challenging. Researchers use complex computer simulations called climate models to predict long-term weather patterns. A model’s reliability depends on the number of variables taken into account and the accuracy of measurements used.

Disease—like malaria
Flooding of homes

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Waiyaki and education (NOTES)

What does education signify for Waiykai? à Meant rebirth, as in raising the white man’s wisdom- Learn the white man’s education and then use it against them. Another factor, it is his response to his father’s call and the mission his father gave him. Education is not only the fulfillment, but the fulfillment of the prophesy. We never find out what he teaches the students, he beats them though. What do you think is being taught in the school? My guess is teaching them how to read. What is important to teach- other ways of life; How to more or less survive in other cultures. Know your enemy- be aware of their tactics. Spreading a political message in a sense; it is easy for the children to believe messages that are taught, it is simple to brain wash. Inoculate against colonial influence. Tactical warfare- understands your enemy in order to fight back.
Page 92, their children can speak a foreign language; their children can read and write.
Page 93- song. Showing school to community, and has children sing song. Interesting. What is left- the battle of wits and the mind. Waiyaki is intimately connected to the things he learned at the mission.
What exactly is the purpose of education in Waiyaki’s mind, how does he think about it? Is it a set of skills? Is it an idea of rebirth?
I think education is used in order to survive. He uses it as a tool to not be colonized. He uses it to bring people together. He does not want to fight the white people. The purpose of education is not to overthrow, it is a way to survive in their world. That explains why there is a group not accepting his methods.

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

thoughts on circumcision

Alright, well like other students in the class i was unsure of the exact practice which takes place during a femal circumcision. So i looked it up- wholey hell was my first though. First off there can be different forms of female circumcision; one of which merely involve minor cutting of the anatomy, but in the case of ritual defloration more radical forms require the complete removal of the parts of the labia. Even more appalling is infibulation, in which the entire parts of the female anatomy are removed and then fastened shut with either thorns or a thread. for those of you who are always inquisitive in class- there is a small opening for urination and "that time of the month". This is all done to ensure that she is virginil, which was seen as desirable. Once married, the woman has to be cut open before intercourse. In some cultures the anatomy is cauterized or rubbed with nettles to destroy the nerve endings! Wholey hell!!! No thank you. That is so desterbing, but then again- that is our culture. Our culture sees the strange in the familiar, meaning giving up the familiar idea that we live our lives only in terms of what we decide in favor of the intially "strange" notion that society shapes these decisions, as it does all our experiences. To give you, reader, and idea an example would be; much like the selection of a mate, the choice of how many children to have woudl seem to be personal. Yet social patterns apply- in the united states the average number of children per family is 2, while in Cambodia it is 4, and in Niger it is 7. So i guess my point behind that is, who are we to say what is culturally acceptable when we are not even intergated in such a society? For our society it is acceptable for the male to be cirsumcised, but odd for the female, this would be strange for the Kikuyu area and its people.

Monday, March 24, 2008

March 24th, thoughts on Nietzsche

Well, there are a lot of things I think about when I think of Nietzsche. First off, Nietzsche's views are very unlike the popular and conventional beliefs and practices of philosophers of his time. His philosophies are more than just controversial and unconventional viewpoints, however; they are absolutely extreme if taken out of context or misinterpreted. Also, if looked at from a different perspective, Nietzsche's work seems to parallel that of the Nazi ideology (not to say he was). For instance, Hitler and the other Nazi leaders did not to indulge in any act of independent creative thought in order to arm their movement with ideas. And in the first few pages of the assigned reading, or the preface, Nietzsche express how "we are necessarily strangers to ourselves" and we are absent minded. Then Nietzsche points out a few more things; firstly, the basis of Nietzsche's philosophy is the complete lack of authority. No God, no order, no rules, only the individual and their own short life. This in itself suggests anarchy which is generally chaotic and dangerous in itself, much like Hitler and the Nazi regiem. With this statement alone, he lays a treacherous foundation for one's thoughts and beliefs.
Next, this only occured about page 17; Nietzsche states that he has given honor to God, but then soon-there-after states that God is the father of evil. So here was my shock... as I have stated several times, I am not that biblically well rounded: but I was shocked when he refered to God as the creater of evil. How could he be? I immediatly thought... he created the heavens, Adam and Eve, all creatures, the Earth!! Then, when I actually stepped back and looked at the broader picture, Nietzsche is right... if God created good and moral, then he had to have created evil. It was just that I have never envisioned God to do such a thing, but as Nietzsche says, "as was only fair" to say such a thing.
And those are my thoughts for today, that I was going to express in class, and I was super pumped for class today- but after I sat there for about 10 minutes and realized no one was there, and that maybe I should check my email just to find out that it was cancelled, a little piece of my died inside... that is how much I love CIE! Alright, later class.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

the idea of intellectual laziness

Early this class, Ed claimed that maybe people are using the bible incorrectly, and there is a lack of intellect when interpreting it. Yes, i am not as well rounded biblically as I would like, but I still have an opinion towards the matter. I think that there is no right or wrong way to interpret the bible. An opinion is just that, an opinion. Due to such, the world has such a religious diversity. I am very glad that there is not just one main religion, I would hate to be a part of global lemmings, all following one idea. Even then, I think someone would be rebellious enough to come up with their own idea. So, i do not agree at all that the bible was misinterpreted... I don’t think a belief can be misinterpreted. That is what it is- a belief. One’s own interpretation- Lots of intelligent thinking, with numerous ramifications.

Why does Darwinism matter? (creationism v. darwinism)

Why does Darwinism matter? In a sense, it shouldn't because it is a belief- there are so many religions, opinions, and beliefs that this "problem" should be just a fly on the wall. Never-the-less, humanity is making a mountain out of a mole hill.
There is a difference between Darwinism and Creationism, one is based on data and the other is based on belief. So why does it matter? Well in the earlier days of Christ, about 6,000 yrs. ago, the only belief was the of the lbreal interpretation of the bible. Everything that occured in the bible, was the actual happening of that time. The idea of “creation science” is derived from most religions that God created the universe-including humans and other living things-all at once in the relatively recent past. Creationists say that creatures started out as distinct and separate organisms when God created them and they do not believe that organisms change into complete differently and distinct animals through evolution. There and then lies the conflict, the problem lies when Creationism argues that faith should take precedent over science, basing its beliefs on one book for guidance, the Bible.
My question is, what if you were not raised with this biblical guidence?! Darwinism concerns itself as a science, which is explained by scientific methodology. Biological evolution concerns changes in living things during the history of life on earth. It explains that living things share common ancestors and over time evolutionary change gives rise to new species. Additionally, Darwinism greatly impacted the scientific world purely through its specific doctrine. The enlightenment had paved the way for rational thinking and observation. People were willing to accept scientific data as fact and they were able to objectively consider theories that went against the church.
Even with that biblical guidence, why does it matter which side you believe? Neither idea can be proven right or wrong. Yes, there is a certain realism that dictates over the other. Creationism is based primarily on ones interpretation of the bible. As opposed to Darwinism: which is based on data. But who cares! Why do people choose to believe what they believe?
I think it has a great deal to do with the way in which you are raised. If you are raised with the guidence of the bible, and attend church every Sunday, then you may leave towards the more mystical belief of Paley. If you are more individualistic and brought up as so, then you may lean more towards Darwinism. My theory comes to: which idea gives people more comfort?
Personally, I lean more towards Darwinism due to its data and realistic view. Yes i would live to live with a mystical view much like Paley, but I was not raised with the bible. In all honesty, I have only read the children's bible, and I only truely know the story of Christmas. Due to my lack of biblical knowledge, do I not have an appreciation for Paley? NO! Because of my lack of biblical knowledge, is it assumed that I will jsut surpass the biblical beliefs all together... no, thank you very much! I like the belief of evolution.
You can't tell me that the world is undergoing evolution even now as I type. Fact- Global Climate Change. The world is re-setting itself from humanitarian mistakes. Fact- babies have tails, until born. Why does it fall off? So yes, due to factual things (also I am an environmental major so that helps) I believe in evolution. On the other hand, I do not liek the idea that we are on the earth just to live, and our life comes to an end at the grave. I like the comforting idea that there is a life after death, because then what are we living for?
All in all, I lean more towards Darwinism, because I am a more factual person. And then I also support Paley, with his idea that everyone is here for a reason, and there is a life after death.

Darwinism thoughts

The text book version of Darwinism is said to be the descending from a common ancestor. However, in all honesty is is nothing more than a mutation (which are random on a microscopic level). More complex species evolve into simpler ones. There is also a need for species struggle, competition, and the manifest of reproductive success.
Branching off from Darwinism is the idea of natural selection. Again the text book version of the term is: it is the process by which favorable heritable traits become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable heritable traits become less common. Additionally, as we have discussed in class: Natural Selection was key to Charles's understanding of the process of natural selection. Darwin realized that the most fit individuals in a population are the ones that are least likely to die of starvation and, therefore, are most likely to pass on their traits to the next generation.