NASA is apparently tampering with the images brought back from Mars changing blue to a red color. According to the article I came across, The original colors on the tabs of the sundial on the craft that was sent to Mars was pictured as blue on Earth. However, once photographed on Mars, the same tab is shown as a red. This being said, the artcle justifies its' claim by stating that if the blue was taken out of the photographs, then "all green elements in the copmlete picture have changed into orange, andall blue elements have changed into red" thus explained by basic color theory.
The article also claims that NASA has tampered the pictures to make the photographs from Mars look "smoggy" and dusty. The photograph presented by NASA gives a good example of this. However, the article states that the smog and dust can easily be made by tampering with the photo by using "the raw RGB (red, green, blue) data provided by JPL to create the same picture." This picture, however, showed a greater amount of detail than the one sent out by NASA.
So who knows, maybe NASA is tampering with the photographs from Mars. Or maybe it is the JPL members, the "good guys" as stated int he article, that are the ones tampering with the colors. After all, their entire point was stated the fact that it would be easy for NASA to alter the colorations in the photographs, there is no reason that JPL can't do the same.
I guess we will just have to wait and see.
website:
http://www.libertythink.com/totalinformation/BlueMars.htm
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Know Thyself-my shortened version
Know Thyself
How does anyone come to form an opinion on an issue? Choosing a side on a debatable topic can say a lot about a certain persons’ morals and beliefs, thus explaining why it is so important to become as informed upon an issue as possible. In terms of the issue, it is important to look at all sides before developing an opinion on the subject; a person should be well informed on the issue at hand in order to develop an opinion that is not ignorant. While facts are important, so are parents, teachers, and other mentor figures shape the views of those who look up to them. On an issue like the death penalty, every detail is important to shaping an opinion. One must look to concrete facts and evidence, which contribute to each argument and speak to surrounding significant members of society in order to develop an opinion.
When first developing an opinion on the issue of the death penalty, I wanted to make sure that I had my facts right. The media can report a lot of often contradictory, “facts”; it is important that one obtains the right information. Faulty information from the media misleads people into believing false things. I managed to look at specific articles that were credible sources on both sides of the issue. I made sure to look at every angle on this issue before forming an opinion, taking both sides into consideration. If a person chooses only to become well informed on one side of the issue, he or she is being ignorant. Without knowing “all the facts”, one can never develop a credible opinion. I can see both sides of the issue at hand, but in the end, the idea behind wanting to take a person’s life for committing a crime like this seems illogical. Both sides of the argument make valid points on the matter, but it seemed to me as though there were fewer points that were pro-death penalty. However, it is important that I did take the time to learn and understand both sides of the issue; had I not done so, my opinion would be completely disregarded in society as uninformed.
The people I surround myself with also have a huge influence on forming my opinion. It is important to develop an opinion on the matter, but it is almost impossible to be completely uninfluenced by parents, teachers, peers, or anyone else. When first asked about the issue, I took my parent’s side, and decided the death penalty was unjust. They have had a big impact on shaping my opinions on debatable issues and I have come to respect their opinions. I then look towards my peers for influence, most of whom were for the death penalty. Their inability to look at the other side of the argument seemed to completely turn me off to even considering the opinion that the death penalty can be justified. I believe it is not a good thing to be completely close-minded on a subject like this. Mentors, such as coaches and teachers, whom I highly respected, also influenced me. I took into account those whom I admired and what their thoughts on the subject are.
However, both factors really contribute to one another in forming my opinion. I cannot seem to look at one without taking the other two into consideration. By looking at these factors, I try to get a look at the complete issue. In terms of the death penalty, I make sure that I have looked at all of the facts before applying a biased opinion formed by my mentors. By doing this I am able to form my own opinion on the matter.
How does anyone come to form an opinion on an issue? Choosing a side on a debatable topic can say a lot about a certain persons’ morals and beliefs, thus explaining why it is so important to become as informed upon an issue as possible. In terms of the issue, it is important to look at all sides before developing an opinion on the subject; a person should be well informed on the issue at hand in order to develop an opinion that is not ignorant. While facts are important, so are parents, teachers, and other mentor figures shape the views of those who look up to them. On an issue like the death penalty, every detail is important to shaping an opinion. One must look to concrete facts and evidence, which contribute to each argument and speak to surrounding significant members of society in order to develop an opinion.
When first developing an opinion on the issue of the death penalty, I wanted to make sure that I had my facts right. The media can report a lot of often contradictory, “facts”; it is important that one obtains the right information. Faulty information from the media misleads people into believing false things. I managed to look at specific articles that were credible sources on both sides of the issue. I made sure to look at every angle on this issue before forming an opinion, taking both sides into consideration. If a person chooses only to become well informed on one side of the issue, he or she is being ignorant. Without knowing “all the facts”, one can never develop a credible opinion. I can see both sides of the issue at hand, but in the end, the idea behind wanting to take a person’s life for committing a crime like this seems illogical. Both sides of the argument make valid points on the matter, but it seemed to me as though there were fewer points that were pro-death penalty. However, it is important that I did take the time to learn and understand both sides of the issue; had I not done so, my opinion would be completely disregarded in society as uninformed.
The people I surround myself with also have a huge influence on forming my opinion. It is important to develop an opinion on the matter, but it is almost impossible to be completely uninfluenced by parents, teachers, peers, or anyone else. When first asked about the issue, I took my parent’s side, and decided the death penalty was unjust. They have had a big impact on shaping my opinions on debatable issues and I have come to respect their opinions. I then look towards my peers for influence, most of whom were for the death penalty. Their inability to look at the other side of the argument seemed to completely turn me off to even considering the opinion that the death penalty can be justified. I believe it is not a good thing to be completely close-minded on a subject like this. Mentors, such as coaches and teachers, whom I highly respected, also influenced me. I took into account those whom I admired and what their thoughts on the subject are.
However, both factors really contribute to one another in forming my opinion. I cannot seem to look at one without taking the other two into consideration. By looking at these factors, I try to get a look at the complete issue. In terms of the death penalty, I make sure that I have looked at all of the facts before applying a biased opinion formed by my mentors. By doing this I am able to form my own opinion on the matter.
Know Thyself-my "wordy" original
Know Thyself
How does anyone come to form an opinion on an issue? Choosing a side on a debatable topic can say a lot about a certain persons’ morals and beliefs, thus explaining why it is so important to become as informed upon an issue as possible. On an issue, such as the death penalty, every detail is important to shaping an opinion. In terms of the issue, it is important to look at all sides before developing an opinion on the subject; a person should be well informed on the issue at hand in order to develop an opinion that is not ignorant. Although facts are important, so are the people that are around you: parents, teachers, and other mentor figures shape the views of those that look up to them. Regardless of whether or not a person is aware of it, they are being influenced to believe a certain thing some way or another. However, even with the persuasion of others, it is always important to look at one’s own personal beliefs before debating an issue. One must look to concrete facts and evidence, which contribute to each argument, speak to surrounding significant members of society, and look at personal morals and beliefs and see where they fit in terms of the issue.
When first developing an opinion on the issue of the death penalty, I wanted to make sure that I had my facts right. The media can say a lot of different, and often contradictory, “facts”; it is therefore vital to be certain that you are getting the right, accurate information. Faulty information from the media tends to mislead people into believing something that may not, in fact, be true. I managed to look at specific articles that were credible sources on both sides of the issue. I made sure to look at every angle on this issue before forming an opinion, taking both sides into consideration. If a person chooses only to become well informed on one side of the issue, they are being ignorant. Without knowing “all the facts” so to speak, one can never develop a strong, credible opinion. I can see how wrong it is to commit the crime of homicide, I can understand that those people are not deserving of a life of their own. I can see both sides of the issue at hand, but in the end, the idea behind wanting to take a person’s life for committing a crime like this seems illogical and faulty. Both sides of the argument make valid points on the matter, but when it came down to it, it seemed to me as though there were a lot less actual points in terms of keeping the death penalty in my opinion. However, it is important that I did take the time to learn and understand both sides of the issue; had I not done so, my opinion would be completely disregarded in society as uninformed.
Another huge influence on my decision on the death penalty is the people that I surround myself with. It is important to develop your own opinion on the matter, but it is almost impossible to be completely uninfluenced by the people you come in contact with, whether it be parents, teachers, peers, or anyone else you have daily social contact with. Coming from a private, conservative prep school with two very liberal teachers as parents helped shape my opinion on the subject matter. When first asked about the opinion, it was natural for me to immediately take the side of my parents. They have had the greatest impact on shaping my opinions on debatable issues more than any other source, and I have come to respect their opinions. I then look towards my peers for influence, most of who were strictly for the death penalty. Their inability to look at the other side of the argument seemed to completely turn me off to even considering the opinion that the death penalty can be justified. Narrow-minded people have a tendency to anger me either way, even if they have the same beliefs I do, it is never a good thing to be completely close-minded on any subject. I also was influenced by other mentor-like figures, such as coaches, and teachers that I highly respected, when making my opinion. I took into account those whom I admired and what their thoughts on the subject are. I figured that since I had so much respect for them, their opinions were some of the most important things to consider.
The final factor I used to determine my opinion was considering my own morals and beliefs. Although I stated earlier that it is important to take into account what others believe, it is also important to uphold your own values. When it came to an issue such as the death penalty, even being uninformed and without being completely bias, I always went back to my beliefs that killing another human is always considered wrong, no matter the context. I personally cannot understand why anyone would want to kill another human being, no matter the situation; and that is what helped form my opinion that the death penalty is wrong. I would never want to jeopardize my own beliefs based on what other people had to say about an issue; I have no problem respecting their thoughts, and taking them into consideration, but I always have to consider my own morals on the subject. The same goes for anyone else: without considering personal beliefs, your opinions will not truly be your opinions. They will just be opinions based on facts and the thoughts of others, not necessarily personal and not actually reflecting the person that you are. My own personal beliefs are always what end up determining where I stand on any issue in the end. If I feel something is wrong because of what I believe, regardless of what it is, I will probably always feel that I must take my own feelings into consideration before deciding which side to take on the matter.
However, all three factors really contribute to one another in forming my opinion. I cannot seem to look at one without taking the other two into consideration. If I am looking at hard evidence for an opposing view point, I always have to consider in the back of my mind what my own morals and beliefs say on the issue as well as what my peers and mentors would say. And if I attempt to form an opinion based strictly on fact or based on the opinion of another, then is it really my opinion? It cannot be because it does not reflect my own personal morals and beliefs. By looking at all three of these factors, I try to manage to get a complete and total look on the issue. In terms of the death penalty, I make sure that I have looked at all of the facts before applying a bias opinion formed by my mentors. I also make sure to keep in mind my values on the subject: no matter how much a person may “deserve” to die, that does not necessarily make it right. My personal beliefs have always taught me that killing is wrong. The three work hand in hand to help determine an opinion.
There are many ways a person can go about forming their own opinion on an issue. For me, I always make sure to use credible information to look at both sides of the issue in order to make sure I fully comprehend each side. I also make sure to consider what my peers and mentors have to say on the issue. If I respect a person, then their opinion is very important to me. Finally, I make sure to take my own morals and beliefs into consideration and see where they fit in terms of the issue. By combining these three factors, I manage to consider all options and sides of the debatable question without forgetting my own beliefs, and I am therefore able to form my own personal opinion on the matter.
How does anyone come to form an opinion on an issue? Choosing a side on a debatable topic can say a lot about a certain persons’ morals and beliefs, thus explaining why it is so important to become as informed upon an issue as possible. On an issue, such as the death penalty, every detail is important to shaping an opinion. In terms of the issue, it is important to look at all sides before developing an opinion on the subject; a person should be well informed on the issue at hand in order to develop an opinion that is not ignorant. Although facts are important, so are the people that are around you: parents, teachers, and other mentor figures shape the views of those that look up to them. Regardless of whether or not a person is aware of it, they are being influenced to believe a certain thing some way or another. However, even with the persuasion of others, it is always important to look at one’s own personal beliefs before debating an issue. One must look to concrete facts and evidence, which contribute to each argument, speak to surrounding significant members of society, and look at personal morals and beliefs and see where they fit in terms of the issue.
When first developing an opinion on the issue of the death penalty, I wanted to make sure that I had my facts right. The media can say a lot of different, and often contradictory, “facts”; it is therefore vital to be certain that you are getting the right, accurate information. Faulty information from the media tends to mislead people into believing something that may not, in fact, be true. I managed to look at specific articles that were credible sources on both sides of the issue. I made sure to look at every angle on this issue before forming an opinion, taking both sides into consideration. If a person chooses only to become well informed on one side of the issue, they are being ignorant. Without knowing “all the facts” so to speak, one can never develop a strong, credible opinion. I can see how wrong it is to commit the crime of homicide, I can understand that those people are not deserving of a life of their own. I can see both sides of the issue at hand, but in the end, the idea behind wanting to take a person’s life for committing a crime like this seems illogical and faulty. Both sides of the argument make valid points on the matter, but when it came down to it, it seemed to me as though there were a lot less actual points in terms of keeping the death penalty in my opinion. However, it is important that I did take the time to learn and understand both sides of the issue; had I not done so, my opinion would be completely disregarded in society as uninformed.
Another huge influence on my decision on the death penalty is the people that I surround myself with. It is important to develop your own opinion on the matter, but it is almost impossible to be completely uninfluenced by the people you come in contact with, whether it be parents, teachers, peers, or anyone else you have daily social contact with. Coming from a private, conservative prep school with two very liberal teachers as parents helped shape my opinion on the subject matter. When first asked about the opinion, it was natural for me to immediately take the side of my parents. They have had the greatest impact on shaping my opinions on debatable issues more than any other source, and I have come to respect their opinions. I then look towards my peers for influence, most of who were strictly for the death penalty. Their inability to look at the other side of the argument seemed to completely turn me off to even considering the opinion that the death penalty can be justified. Narrow-minded people have a tendency to anger me either way, even if they have the same beliefs I do, it is never a good thing to be completely close-minded on any subject. I also was influenced by other mentor-like figures, such as coaches, and teachers that I highly respected, when making my opinion. I took into account those whom I admired and what their thoughts on the subject are. I figured that since I had so much respect for them, their opinions were some of the most important things to consider.
The final factor I used to determine my opinion was considering my own morals and beliefs. Although I stated earlier that it is important to take into account what others believe, it is also important to uphold your own values. When it came to an issue such as the death penalty, even being uninformed and without being completely bias, I always went back to my beliefs that killing another human is always considered wrong, no matter the context. I personally cannot understand why anyone would want to kill another human being, no matter the situation; and that is what helped form my opinion that the death penalty is wrong. I would never want to jeopardize my own beliefs based on what other people had to say about an issue; I have no problem respecting their thoughts, and taking them into consideration, but I always have to consider my own morals on the subject. The same goes for anyone else: without considering personal beliefs, your opinions will not truly be your opinions. They will just be opinions based on facts and the thoughts of others, not necessarily personal and not actually reflecting the person that you are. My own personal beliefs are always what end up determining where I stand on any issue in the end. If I feel something is wrong because of what I believe, regardless of what it is, I will probably always feel that I must take my own feelings into consideration before deciding which side to take on the matter.
However, all three factors really contribute to one another in forming my opinion. I cannot seem to look at one without taking the other two into consideration. If I am looking at hard evidence for an opposing view point, I always have to consider in the back of my mind what my own morals and beliefs say on the issue as well as what my peers and mentors would say. And if I attempt to form an opinion based strictly on fact or based on the opinion of another, then is it really my opinion? It cannot be because it does not reflect my own personal morals and beliefs. By looking at all three of these factors, I try to manage to get a complete and total look on the issue. In terms of the death penalty, I make sure that I have looked at all of the facts before applying a bias opinion formed by my mentors. I also make sure to keep in mind my values on the subject: no matter how much a person may “deserve” to die, that does not necessarily make it right. My personal beliefs have always taught me that killing is wrong. The three work hand in hand to help determine an opinion.
There are many ways a person can go about forming their own opinion on an issue. For me, I always make sure to use credible information to look at both sides of the issue in order to make sure I fully comprehend each side. I also make sure to consider what my peers and mentors have to say on the issue. If I respect a person, then their opinion is very important to me. Finally, I make sure to take my own morals and beliefs into consideration and see where they fit in terms of the issue. By combining these three factors, I manage to consider all options and sides of the debatable question without forgetting my own beliefs, and I am therefore able to form my own personal opinion on the matter.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
I have found the cure for cancer online!
Apparently there is a cure for cancer, and it comes in a drug that is cheap and has the ability to kill most cancers. What is this miracle drug? Dicholoroaetate (DCA) is a “relatively safe” drug that reawakens the mitochondria in cells, which causes them to die. Apparently when the mitochondria is “turned off, hey become “immortal”, outliving other cells in the tumor and so becoming dominant." The article then claims that once the mitochondria are reactivated by the DCA, they “order the abnormal cells to die” by reactivating apoptosis.
But back to this idea of being “relatively safe”, I can’t imagine what that means. According to the article, “DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients, but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be effective against all cancers” Where is the proof that this works on “all cancers” though? I do not see a reason why someone with cancer would want to use this potentially harmful treatment when it have only been experimented on rats and human skin cells. So perhaps we these scientists should reconsider making such a bold statement as “cures all cancers” without doing all of the research first.
website:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10971
But back to this idea of being “relatively safe”, I can’t imagine what that means. According to the article, “DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients, but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be effective against all cancers” Where is the proof that this works on “all cancers” though? I do not see a reason why someone with cancer would want to use this potentially harmful treatment when it have only been experimented on rats and human skin cells. So perhaps we these scientists should reconsider making such a bold statement as “cures all cancers” without doing all of the research first.
website:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10971
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
"History's Big Lie"...apparently.
Even the idea of a person that does not believe in the Holocaust seems absolutely ridiculous, hence the reason I was so surprised to come across a myriad of articles claiming that it was history’s “biggest lie”. In the article I read, it began with by using the “logic” that “how could Hitler kill 6,500,000 Jews although they were only 3,450,000 in German occupation?” Perhaps the author of this article should check his facts before making such a bold statement. While there may have been only 3,450,000 Jews in Germany at the time, the Nazis did not stay put in Germany alone, thus ending the credibility of his argument before the article is even read.
However, to help his argument, the author attempts to justify that these other Jews fled the country before the war even began, “Jewish migration to the Soviet Union, therefore, reduces the number of Jews within the sphere of German occupation to around 3.5 million” But where exactly is he getting this evidence from? It almost seems like he pulled random numbers out of a hat and decided to prove his case upon them. It seems somewhat illogical.
Another piece of evidence that the author tries to use is the fact that “Hitler was killing all, not Jews especially” Although it is true that Hitler was not focused specifically on the Jews, he also killed homosexuals, mentally disabled, etc., he was not killing “all”.
All in all, the pieces of evidence that the author uses are not logical, nor are the completely accurate. Before anyone would even have to consider his point, he would have to revise his claims to match the evidences he provides; however, that would be seemingly impossible since neither his claims nor his evidence are accurate.
article:
http://www.resistance.jeeran.com/holocaust/index.html
However, to help his argument, the author attempts to justify that these other Jews fled the country before the war even began, “Jewish migration to the Soviet Union, therefore, reduces the number of Jews within the sphere of German occupation to around 3.5 million” But where exactly is he getting this evidence from? It almost seems like he pulled random numbers out of a hat and decided to prove his case upon them. It seems somewhat illogical.
Another piece of evidence that the author tries to use is the fact that “Hitler was killing all, not Jews especially” Although it is true that Hitler was not focused specifically on the Jews, he also killed homosexuals, mentally disabled, etc., he was not killing “all”.
All in all, the pieces of evidence that the author uses are not logical, nor are the completely accurate. Before anyone would even have to consider his point, he would have to revise his claims to match the evidences he provides; however, that would be seemingly impossible since neither his claims nor his evidence are accurate.
article:
http://www.resistance.jeeran.com/holocaust/index.html
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
ALIENS EXIST...or so they say.
After coming across the ABC article on proof that aliens exist, I was rather disappointed. The article begins by trying to justify the following arguments with evidence from what may seem to be a reliable source: “President Carter, who said, ‘I saw one, but I don’t know where’…astronaut Gordon Cooper, who says he saw ‘this typical saucer shape”. By using these two “witnesses”, the writer hopes to convince the audience that UFO believers can “weed out the wackos and present credible witnesses.” But who credible are President Carter and Gordon Cooper? After all, they are just regular humans, built no differently than the rest of us. Where are these “credible sources “ then?
The article then moves to attempting to claim more evidence through what is supposed to be fact, “hundreds and possibly thousands of people…reported seeing an array of lights and enormous delta-shaped craft.” However, this “fact” does not seem very credible in that there is not enough hard evidence to prove this point. It is just a bunch of people making a claim that in itself it unjustified by any real evidence.
Descriptions of these aliens and saucers are scattered throughout this article as well as if to attempt to help justify the words coming out of the Former President’s mouth. These descriptions seemed somewhat similar in their claim, “what appeared as a triangular craft.” However, these descriptions are lacking, like the rest of the claims in this article, hard evidence.
article: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=3349575
The article then moves to attempting to claim more evidence through what is supposed to be fact, “hundreds and possibly thousands of people…reported seeing an array of lights and enormous delta-shaped craft.” However, this “fact” does not seem very credible in that there is not enough hard evidence to prove this point. It is just a bunch of people making a claim that in itself it unjustified by any real evidence.
Descriptions of these aliens and saucers are scattered throughout this article as well as if to attempt to help justify the words coming out of the Former President’s mouth. These descriptions seemed somewhat similar in their claim, “what appeared as a triangular craft.” However, these descriptions are lacking, like the rest of the claims in this article, hard evidence.
article: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=3349575
I don't understand this belief!
Ultimate Frisbee is a popular game played among College and High School Students alike. Honestly, I have never really understood why. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that my fellow peers can find something that they enjoy so much, but I just don't get why they like it. I have tried my hand at playing the game, and quite frankly, running around trying to catch a flying disk just doesn't appeal to me. Even those who are not good at Frisbee seem to enjoy the game. What exactly am I missing? When I played it seemed like nothing but utter chaos and confusion. Is that what my peers are enjoying these days? I don't know. One thing is for sure, there must be something I am not seeing regarding this popular recreational activity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)