Post Comments like this:
1. Your Name
2. A Title
3. A short personal commentary what you learned from it or what made you curious about it given the week's class content. However, it doesn't have to be about the week's content, only something related to human-environmental interactions.
4. Then put a long line ('-------------------)'.
5. Then cut/paste A SMALL PART of the article or topic you found. (This is because blogger.com now has a limit of "4096 characters" in blog comments. However, that should be enough to concentrate on your own comments, and provide an excerpt and a link to the original article. If you do want more space, and I encourage it, just post a second time in the thread of each week to get another "4096 characters".)
6. Then a small line '---'.
7. Then, finally, paste the URL (link) of the post.
Post for the first week on this thread. I'll set up a new main post each week, and then we will do the same.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a test comment of what to do.
ReplyDelete1. Mark Whitaker
2. My Comment's Title
3. There is something about the following article that interests me, fascinates me, and/or makes me wonder what the article leaves out, etc. I can write as much as I want on this blog about my view on the article and the issues that it discusses. I can write about personal experiences that the article reminded me about. I can write about a different view of the same issues that the article mentions. I can convince people of something, express my intelligence, and express my emotion in this comment.
-----------------------------
[repost introduction to article here]
---
[URL / web location of the article]
Christoffer Grønlund
ReplyDelete"Save the world, ignore global warming"
This article is written by Danish environmentalist and international provocateur Bjørn Lomborg. His view on the global warming issue has been upsetting to both environmentalists as well as economists all over the world. Lomborg really do not want us (the people of the world) to react to the threat of global warming, thus the result is not by far satisfying compared to what other reasonable things the ressources could be used for. For me Bjørn Lomborg has a point, however it is controversial to take a stand that says, that we really do not want to help the world as we know it to become older.
I think it is worth a discussion at least.
----------------------
Save the world, ignore global warming
By Bjorn Lomborg
Published: 12:01AM GMT 12 Dec 2004
Global warming has become the obsession of our time. From governments and campaigners meeting for the climate summit in Buenos Aires right now we hear the incessant admonition: making global warming our first priority is the moral test of our age.
Yet they are wrong. Global warming is real and caused by CO2. The trouble is that the climate models show we can do very little about the warming. Even if everyone (including the United States) did Kyoto and stuck to it throughout the century, the change would be almost immeasurable, postponing warming by just six years in 2100.
---
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3613517/Save-the-world-ignore-global-warming.html
1. Hyun-deok, Park/ Helena
ReplyDelete2. The death of the Aral Sea
3. There are many people who think environment catastrophe is made by irresistable force and is just natural happenings. But this case is clearly that human-made disaster. Because without Soviet planning in 1940s, the sea won't be shrunk like this only by global warming. So as we read this article, we can remind that environment policy is irrevocable and its influence can cause unexpectable misfortune.
-----------------------------------------------
The Aral Sea's fate was sealed as early as 1918, however, when the Soviet authorities decided to divert two rivers that supplied the sea towards a neighbouring Uzbek desert in order to turn the region into one of the biggest raw cotton producers. Construction of the canals began in the 1940s, and although the USSR did succeed in growing cotton and rice out of desert land, by the beginning of the 1960s the sea's water level had started to fall. The lake since split in two, and then three. This year, one of the three dried up completely, leaving only 6,000 squared kilometres of water left in Kazakhstan, where efforts by the government maintain the remaining northern lake.
----
http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20090827-death-aral-sea-soviet-irrigation-cotton-desert
1. Young Woon Han / Young Han
ReplyDelete2. "Saving penguin means saving mankind"
3. The article elaborates on how current climate change harmed the population of the penguins and the polar bears. With much details on the relationship between temperature and survival of these species, the article concludes that mankind can and will follow the same fate if we don't act upon it quickly.
---------------------------------------------
4.Some scientist say that the problems the penguins and the polar bears face at the extremes of the world may serve as a preview of what will happen to the rest of the planet and all other species, including humans.
---------------------------------------------
5. http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/energy/2009/03/23/climate-change-could-harm-penguins-and-polar-bears.html
Sujin Kwon / Sue
ReplyDelete"Do we really need to ban plastic bags?"
This article is about banning plastic bags, which are being used in our life everyday. Plastic bags are so convenient easily obtainable and extremely affordable. (It costs only few cents or even free in so many countries) It is already used commonly and widely so banning plastic bags is also causing problems. This article indicates side effects of banning plastic bags that we have to consider in real.
------------------
Leo Hickman
The Guardian, Tuesday 11 August 2009 Article history
...Plastic bags are one of the most recognisable symbols of our modern throwaway culture. In the decades since their introduction – the first plastic "baggies" for bread, sandwiches and fruit were introduced in the US in 1957 – their use has become ubiquitous across the planet. One million are handed out every minute, according to We Are What We Do, the not-for-profit group that was the driving force behind the Anya Hindmarch-designed "I'm Not A Plastic Bag" reusable carrier that briefly – and somewhat ironically – became a must-have accessory in 2007...
---
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/aug/11/plastic-bags-welsh-assembly
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Hyun A Kim
ReplyDelete2. It's time to learn from frogs
3. This article mainly talks about increasing abnormalities among humans particularly in sexual organs comes from the deformities in water animals such as frogs. It explains that increasing numbers of genital deformities among newborn boys and misshaped sexual organs and cancer among girls are all cause of endocrine disruptors which is a class of chemicals used in agriculture, industry and consumer products. It also states that even though this "scary" incidence is rising, there hasn't been much public notice or government action.
-----------------------------
......The scientific case is still far from proven, as chemical companies emphasize, and the uncertainties for humans are vast. But there is accumulating evidence that male sperm count is dropping and that genital abnormalities in newborn boys are increasing. Some studies show correlations between these abnormalities and mothers who have greater exposure to these chemicals during pregnancy, through everything from hair spray to the water they drink......
---http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/opinion/28kristof.html
1. christoffer grønlund
ReplyDelete2. Sudan Court Fines Woman for Wearing Trousers
3. Why is this interesting? Because it is ridiculous. Because it is indecent. Because it is just plain wrong. Because it is undermining what we all know is true; the female are the stronger of the two sexes. To realise that we still have big areas and countries in the world that without hesitation will lash women for wearing trousers, truly show that there is a long way to go. Some would say it is purely a religious thing. I would say that, nevermind me narrow insight in Islam, it does not say anywhere that women can not wear pants.
--------------------------------------
NAIROBI, Kenya — A Sudanese woman who wore pants in public was fined the equivalent of $200 but spared a whipping on Monday when a court found her guilty of violating Sudan’s decency laws.
The woman, Lubna Hussein, an outspoken journalist who had recently worked for the United Nations, faced up to 40 lashes in the case, which has generated considerable interest both inside and outside Sudan.
Mrs. Hussein vowed to appeal the sentence and even walked into the court in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital, wearing the same pair of loose-fitting green slacks that she had been arrested in.
Manal Awad Khogali, one of her lawyers, said the judge hearing the case had called only police witnesses to testify and refused to allow Mrs. Hussein — who had pledged to use her trial to bring attention to women’s rights in Sudan — to defend herself.
“He didn’t give us a chance,” Mrs. Manal said.
After the trial was over, Mrs. Hussein, a 34-year-old widow, seemed defiant as ever. “I will not pay a penny,” she told The Associated Press.
The judge had threatened to jail her for one month if she did not pay the fine. But according to The A.P., Mrs. Hussein said flatly: “I would spend a month in jail. It is a chance to explore the conditions in jail.”
On Monday night, after refusing her lawyers’ advice to pay, Mrs. Hussein was whisked off to jail, though her lawyers said that in the coming days a committee formed for her defense might pay the fine and free her.
Sudan is partly governed by Islamic law, which calls for women to dress modestly. But the law is vague. According to Article 152 of Sudan’s penal code, anyone “who commits an indecent act which violates public morality or wears indecent clothing” can be fined and lashed up to 40 times.
It was the potential lashing, customarily carried out with a plastic whip that can leave permanent scars, that seemed to raise so many eyebrows. On Monday, diplomats from the British, French, Canadian, Swedish and Dutch Embassies showed up at the Khartoum courthouse, along with a throng of female protesters, many wearing pants. Witnesses said several bearded counterprotesters in traditional Islamic dress also arrived and yelled, “God is great.”
Riot police officers broke up the demonstration and took away more than 40 women. Sudanese officials said they were released shortly afterward. Witnesses said the police beat up at least one woman.
----
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/08/world/africa/08sudan.html?ref=world
In India and Bangladesh, people sometimes "punish" women who wear short sleeves tops which does not cover their shoulder or skirt or pants that are not over kneelength. I could wear'em because I was foreigner but if it is another girl who's Indian or Bengali and then they'd do something bad on her for sure. But it's more like one of the culture, not the law, certainly. This article is insane. I mean, this country. This culture. This law, these people.
ReplyDelete