DomoNation.com: James whaaatt? by St Jimmy
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Thursday, 20 December 2012
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Industrial Revolution: by Matthew, Angus, and Elli
DomoNation.com: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Industrial rev by genghis khan
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Sara, Campion, and Andy Social Video
DomoNation.com: Social Prorject by SocialStudiesGroup
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
A. Mackenzie Animation
Here's my animation, it was originally longer but GoAnimate doesn't let you publish videos longer than two minutes. If the text goes by too fast, that's why.
Industrial Revolution Cartoon by Riley, Jonas, Natalie
DomoNation.com: Industrial Rev. (good one) by Social Project
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
The Industial Revolution By: Miranda, Jade & Sam
DomoNation.com: The Industrial revolution by Jade11
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Effects of the Industrial Revolution
By: Logan, Jacob and Alexa
DomoNation.com: The Industrial Revolution in Britain by glittergoober22
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
DomoNation.com: The Industrial Revolution in Britain by glittergoober22
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Agricultural and Industrial Rev-- Maija, Nicole, Hannah
DomoNation.com: SS Project by GoAnimate101
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Like it? Create your own at DomoNation.com. It's free and fun!
Industrial Revolution by John, Hannah R., Vikram
Industrial Revolution by hroth1 on GoAnimate
Animated Presentations - Powered by GoAnimate. Using Go animate
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
Deforestation
Deforestation is the clearing of forested land for timber production, farming, mining, livestock grazing, and urban development. The reduction in Earth's forest cover started at least 8,000 years ago, when humans began to clear land to allow for easier hunting . With the development of agriculture, humans cleared still more land to grow crops. Use of forests for firewood and building materials is also deeply ingrained in human culture around the world. Unfortunately, In most areas, removal of trees causes soil erosion and increases the risk of flooding and also reduces the biodiversity of the forest, since many species, from insects to birds, depend upon forest-based habitats. Remaining species may subsequently be affected by disruption in the food chain. Animals are forced to leaves their homes , many abandon nests and burrows with young inside because of the destruction of the forests.Climate scientists also argue that loss of trees can disrupt natural balances of moisture loss that result in abnormal levels of wildfires and make areas more susceptible to drought. In turn, fires cause their own environmental problems, emitting many fine particles into the air that can upset precipitation patterns. and the loss of carbon absorbing plants and trees results in more toxins and gasses in the already polluted ozone.On a global scale, the rate in which forests are lost offsets efforts to stabilize forest cover by protecting forests, by reforestation (re-planting trees), or by land management practices that allow natural for regrowth over time.Around half of harvested wood is used as fuel; the other half is used for building, producing paper, and other uses. In many African countries, wood is the main source of domestic fuel. the burning of wood causes more carbon dioxide which cannot be absorbed due to the lack of trees.
information from google and global issues in context.
Sunday, 7 October 2012
International Adoption
History: In the 1950's proxy adoptions were the most common form of international adoptions. This form of adoption allowed families to send an agent overseas to seek out a child, that they would then bring back to the family looking to adopt. The problem with this form of adoption though, was that it was unregulated and did not meet minimum standards to protect children. In the 1960's the amount of international adoption went up, because of the legalization of abortions in the united states many people could no longer adopt domestically and there were often more people looking to adopt than there were children to be adopted. This caused families to look to foreign countries where poverty left many children in need to a stable environment. Since then global changes have made the need for international adoption a major one. For example China's one child law caused many families to give up children (often girls) that they were not allowed to raise as their own. Over the years China, Guatemala, South Korea, Ukraine and Ethiopia have been the major countries providing children to the united states.
International adoption is Global issue that we face, and have been facing for many years. Not only is it a question of whether or not children should be raised in countries other than their home country, where they are not exposed to their culture and customs, but we also look at the means ichildren children are brought into the adoption process. Many people say that International adoption is a savior for the children of foreign countries who would otherwise be brought up in poverty. It provides them with a stable and loving home and family, and the education and resources they need to live a healthy and successful life. On the other side though many people argue that it is not in the child's best interest to grow up in a country other than their birth country, and that the practice of international adoption may be predatory with many children being kidnapped from their families or mothers being bribed to give them up. I believe that International adoption does have have a great ability to provide children with successful and healthy lifestyles that they would not achieve in their home countries, but that the means of obtaining the children who are to be adopted must be humane for this process to benefit anyone at all
So why is it that the views on this issue are so contradicting? Well on one side there is the belief that adopting children from other countries is saving them from the hardships they would be facing in their own countries. In many cases the children would be forced into poverty, abandoned by their parents and forced to fend for themselves. They could suffer from disease, starvation, and natural disaster. International adoption has the ability to provide stable and loving homes for children who may have been abused, neglected or abandoned by their parents. It helps children feel loved and accepted by loving people who help them to succeed in their lives, with education and occupations.
On the other side people believe its a practice that exploits families in poor countries. Sometimes adoption agencies pose as legitimate organization, but engage in abductions and bribery to procure children for the orphanages. This brings up the situation of child trafficking; adoption agencies get payed for sending children across seas, so they attempt to send as many as they can. In many cases adoption agencies bribe soon to be mothers with money or other goods, and the mothers are so desperate that they are willing to give up their children for these bribes. Another concern that arises is if it is in the child's best interest to be brought up in a country other than their home country. They
would be growing up away from their culture and traditions, and would be assimilated into a brand
new countries culture. It is believed that culture should be preserved and many people see the act of
international adoption as one that is going against this. one last issue is that when children are taken from their homes and put up for international adoption is that often the adopting parents are unaware
of any medical concerns, or if the child wil need any special help and attention due to the
unwillingness to be brought to another a country, or difficultly dealing with culture change that they
will be facing.
In my opinion. International adoption is a great way to provide children with safe and secure lives, but only in the means of procuring the children is safe and humane. If a child is taken from its home without consent from the parents then the child may grow up resentful and out of place. I strongly believe the Hague Convention organization ( http://adoption.state.gov/hague_convention/overview.php ) which provides set guidelines and standards for the circumstances under which a child is adopted. It aims to prevent the abduction or trafficking of children internationally and makes sure the adoption is in the best intrest for the child. I believe under this agreement is the only circumstance where international adoption can be monitored and benefiting for all.
For more information visit the following:
http://adoption.state.gov/index.php
International adoption is Global issue that we face, and have been facing for many years. Not only is it a question of whether or not children should be raised in countries other than their home country, where they are not exposed to their culture and customs, but we also look at the means ichildren children are brought into the adoption process. Many people say that International adoption is a savior for the children of foreign countries who would otherwise be brought up in poverty. It provides them with a stable and loving home and family, and the education and resources they need to live a healthy and successful life. On the other side though many people argue that it is not in the child's best interest to grow up in a country other than their birth country, and that the practice of international adoption may be predatory with many children being kidnapped from their families or mothers being bribed to give them up. I believe that International adoption does have have a great ability to provide children with successful and healthy lifestyles that they would not achieve in their home countries, but that the means of obtaining the children who are to be adopted must be humane for this process to benefit anyone at all
So why is it that the views on this issue are so contradicting? Well on one side there is the belief that adopting children from other countries is saving them from the hardships they would be facing in their own countries. In many cases the children would be forced into poverty, abandoned by their parents and forced to fend for themselves. They could suffer from disease, starvation, and natural disaster. International adoption has the ability to provide stable and loving homes for children who may have been abused, neglected or abandoned by their parents. It helps children feel loved and accepted by loving people who help them to succeed in their lives, with education and occupations.
On the other side people believe its a practice that exploits families in poor countries. Sometimes adoption agencies pose as legitimate organization, but engage in abductions and bribery to procure children for the orphanages. This brings up the situation of child trafficking; adoption agencies get payed for sending children across seas, so they attempt to send as many as they can. In many cases adoption agencies bribe soon to be mothers with money or other goods, and the mothers are so desperate that they are willing to give up their children for these bribes. Another concern that arises is if it is in the child's best interest to be brought up in a country other than their home country. They
would be growing up away from their culture and traditions, and would be assimilated into a brand
new countries culture. It is believed that culture should be preserved and many people see the act of
international adoption as one that is going against this. one last issue is that when children are taken from their homes and put up for international adoption is that often the adopting parents are unaware
of any medical concerns, or if the child wil need any special help and attention due to the
unwillingness to be brought to another a country, or difficultly dealing with culture change that they
will be facing.
In my opinion. International adoption is a great way to provide children with safe and secure lives, but only in the means of procuring the children is safe and humane. If a child is taken from its home without consent from the parents then the child may grow up resentful and out of place. I strongly believe the Hague Convention organization ( http://adoption.state.gov/hague_convention/overview.php ) which provides set guidelines and standards for the circumstances under which a child is adopted. It aims to prevent the abduction or trafficking of children internationally and makes sure the adoption is in the best intrest for the child. I believe under this agreement is the only circumstance where international adoption can be monitored and benefiting for all.
For more information visit the following:
http://adoption.state.gov/index.php
Wednesday, 3 October 2012
Smoking (Cigarettes and Tobacco)
Smoking animoto video
Smoking (Cigarettes and Tobacco)
Ever Since the European explores came to Canada, discovered tobacco and how to smoke it, people have wondered a great many thing; such as health concerns and morality. While some people argue that smoking hasn't damaged them or their children, others relate to very specific scientific evidence to back up the health concerns of smoking or chewing tobacco. Clearly, when considered, Tobacco is an unnecessary and dangerous product.
Tobacco and smoking started with the native Americans in the U.S. and Canada, mainly for ceremonies and rituals.Then, when European explorers came, they started to use it, if a bit more casually than the Natives. Not everyone used tobacco back then, and it wasn't laced with all the chemicals a modern cigarette would have. They were normally powdered or made from dried tobacco leaves. Although some considered it immoral or unhealthy it still grew as a fad. Tobacco, in itself, isn't the most harmful thing you could induce, and you could live to an old age, healthy if you only smoked tobacco. However, today's cigarette is usually laced with over 4,000 chemicals. These chemicals include: carbon monoxide (car exhaust), nicotine (in it's pure form, a drop on the tongue will kill), arsenic (rat poison), and sulfuric acid (used in car batteries) to name a few. Don't think that smoking affects only you. It affects everyone around you. If you smoke openly around anyone, you give them what's called "second hand smoke". Breathing in second hand smoke is basically the same as letting anyone around you smoke. This is basically letting your child, friends, family, or complete strangers to inhale the same chemicals and drugs you're ingesting; which puts them at risks of the same diseases as you.There are upsides and downsides to smoking, but the downsides heavily outweigh the upsides.
Regardless of this background, people still believe the use of cigarettes are ethical and fair to use. Yes, statistics have shown that it does calm you down after any rough day. Smoking will suppress your appetite, therefore, if you're looking to lose weight, smoking can help with that. The Nicotine inside is a reactant stimulant, which will increase your reflexes; plus, if you're in a rock band, you'll get a really deep singing voice ( Not necessarily a good thing). Most importantly, though, the tobacco industry is huge. The government heavily relies on it, because of taxes it. It is a massive part of our economy. If we were to take it away, it'd be like taking a nicotine addict's smokes and flushing it all down the toilet. The economy would collapse and most likely be thrown into a great depression. However, like nicotine, an economy could be weaned off the destructive influence the tobacco industry has over it.
As stated above, the cons of smoking greatly outweigh the pros. For instance, it is proven to be the leading cause of lung disease.
On the left is how a lung should look, whereas on the left is a diseased lung, how you start to look after smoking for a good while. Lung cancer isn't the only major problem associated with smoking, however. Two other major lung diseases include cardiovascular disease and emphysema or chronic bronchitis. The two most contributing chemicals in a cigarette are nicotine and carbon monoxide. Nicotine is a stimulant drug. It hooks your brain on cigarettes and slowly breaks down your immunity until it has you totally reliant and can't go through a day without lighting up. Carbon monoxide is the other part of the problem. It is the product of Car Exhaust. It reduces the amount of oxygen in your body, this is why you see so many smokers always coughing.
Smoking causes several cardiovascular diseases, cigarettes are laced with too many dangerous chemicals and drugs, although the economy is reliant on the industry, it could be weaned off. Second hand smoke lets anyone around you smoke, and puts them at risk of everything you're at risk of. If cigarettes were banned, death rates would be dropped and cancer would be a lot less common. Clearly, after consideration, cigarettes and related products are unnecessary and dangerous.
right to bear arms
The right to bear arms
The right to bear arms is a huge issue that affects many people all around the world, especially in the USA. In the second amendment of the Constitution in the states it clearly states that every citizen in tat country has the right to carry firearms to protect themselves. It makes huge contravorsy because nobody knows if i makes more crime or less crime.
This should be a right that should not be negotiable at all.Governors are taking it onto themselves to make this right illegal, which is going against their own countries constitution! The right to bear arms has been proven to create a safer society, due to the fact that people have the ability to scare off criminals and protect themselves and their loved ones. What people don't seem to realize is that the majority of criminal acts committed with a firearm are done by people who obtain them illegally It has nothing to do with the innocent people who carry them with permits. The government needs to get that through their head, because right now it feels like they're accusing us innocent gun owners.
Right now it is illegal to carry firearms in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Colorado, Missouri, Kansas, Louisiana , Mississippi, Alabama, North Carolina, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maine, Delaware and New Hampshire. This is alot of states, so there are a lot of people that don't agree with the gun carrying law. This also means that there are many people who don't know who to properly protect themselves. Guns are always going to be made and sold, no matter how much you dislike that fact. So if this is the truth, why not take advantage of it. Why not arm the people instead of arming the criminals and the gangs. Everyone has the right to protect themselves and living in a world where violence and murder is very common, why not take the innechiative to not become another body at the bottom of a river. That's sounds harsh and sinister, but it is the complete truth. Sometimes the truth is cold and not appreciated telling, but right now I don't see any other way to get it through people's heads. Some people say words are the best weapon, but when u have a strung out junkie attacking you, words are not going to do to much.
Now I am not trying to promote violence and hatred at all. I'm an simply making a point saying that everyone has the right to protect themselves. We could cut the innocent murder rate by nearly 50% if we gave this tactic a try. No one likes the idea of killing and slaughter, but we have to make everyone realize that this will remove the chance of this happening to you or any of your loved ones. Also, like I said before, the criminals that commit all these crimes do not have legally purchased fire arms with licences and permits. They obtain them through the black market and other illegal ways. The citizens are not responsible for the killings that happen, and for the government to make this right illegal, makes it feel like they are putting the blame on us. They are acting like everyone is a crazy, criminal that wants to go out and shoot for no good reason. This is ridiculous and shows the government has no trust in us. For the government not to respect us is a disgrace and a slap in the face to everyone. We have the right to protect our selves and I'm not allowing a deceiving politician to say otherwise!
Animoto vid:
Bibliography
Internet source,http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_bear_arms, published: unknown
Internet source, http://www.catb.org/esr/fortunes/rkba.html, published: unknown
This should be a right that should not be negotiable at all.Governors are taking it onto themselves to make this right illegal, which is going against their own countries constitution! The right to bear arms has been proven to create a safer society, due to the fact that people have the ability to scare off criminals and protect themselves and their loved ones. What people don't seem to realize is that the majority of criminal acts committed with a firearm are done by people who obtain them illegally It has nothing to do with the innocent people who carry them with permits. The government needs to get that through their head, because right now it feels like they're accusing us innocent gun owners.
Right now it is illegal to carry firearms in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Colorado, Missouri, Kansas, Louisiana , Mississippi, Alabama, North Carolina, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maine, Delaware and New Hampshire. This is alot of states, so there are a lot of people that don't agree with the gun carrying law. This also means that there are many people who don't know who to properly protect themselves. Guns are always going to be made and sold, no matter how much you dislike that fact. So if this is the truth, why not take advantage of it. Why not arm the people instead of arming the criminals and the gangs. Everyone has the right to protect themselves and living in a world where violence and murder is very common, why not take the innechiative to not become another body at the bottom of a river. That's sounds harsh and sinister, but it is the complete truth. Sometimes the truth is cold and not appreciated telling, but right now I don't see any other way to get it through people's heads. Some people say words are the best weapon, but when u have a strung out junkie attacking you, words are not going to do to much.
Now I am not trying to promote violence and hatred at all. I'm an simply making a point saying that everyone has the right to protect themselves. We could cut the innocent murder rate by nearly 50% if we gave this tactic a try. No one likes the idea of killing and slaughter, but we have to make everyone realize that this will remove the chance of this happening to you or any of your loved ones. Also, like I said before, the criminals that commit all these crimes do not have legally purchased fire arms with licences and permits. They obtain them through the black market and other illegal ways. The citizens are not responsible for the killings that happen, and for the government to make this right illegal, makes it feel like they are putting the blame on us. They are acting like everyone is a crazy, criminal that wants to go out and shoot for no good reason. This is ridiculous and shows the government has no trust in us. For the government not to respect us is a disgrace and a slap in the face to everyone. We have the right to protect our selves and I'm not allowing a deceiving politician to say otherwise!
Animoto vid:
Bibliography
Internet source,http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_bear_arms, published: unknown
Internet source, http://www.catb.org/esr/fortunes/rkba.html, published: unknown
Tuesday, 2 October 2012
Bollocks to the Burka Ban
Imagine yourself as a Muslim. Culturally, for the past hundreds of years, you have worn full body scarves covering your face to show modesty and dedication to your religion. You fully believe this is the right thing to do, and you choose to wear said scarf. You suddenly are restricted this right, and are forced to remove your religious headscarf to obey the rules of the insensitive right-wing rulers of your country. This is not only an invasion of personal freedoms, but insensitive to one’s culture and religion. It’s equivalent of forcing Jewish people to eat pork, or barring Christians out of church. It’s a fundamental human right to practice religion freely, and restricting on these rights is inhumane and insensitive. Some may argue that it restricts female’s rights in society, and that it’s a symbol of the suppression of women in Muslim countries, however it’s all in the woman’s right to wear or not to wear the scarf. To state such is just plain silly. It’s a person’s right to wear what he/she wants to wear. This issue not only extends to the Muslim community, but it extends to non-Muslims, and even intercontinentally, from Europe to North America. It’s important that we recognize individual rights, and taking a step forward against intolerance and restriction, because it may be us next.
Muslim headscarves such as burkas and Hijabs have been the center of religious controversy in central Europe for decades, mainly France and Turkey. In France, laws state that church and government must stay separate, and that religious symbols such as hijabs and crosses must not be worn in schools or government institutions. Laws in Turkey forbid any headscarves from use in government buildings or institutions. These laws create great controversy for the Muslim communities in both nations, where they are culturally required to wear these headpieces. Many Muslims feel as if their fundamental rights are being suppressed and as if they’re being discriminated against. The governments, however, think differently.The argument of the French government is that the women are being suppressed by the burka, and that it’s sexist and backwards. They believe that the women are forced to wear these headscarves, and that they have no choice but to wear them. They see them as an encompassing tomb, in which Muslim women are forcefully locked into, doomed to spend their lives behind the horrible fabric that is the headscarf. Muslim women everywhere are forced to toil in these terrible scarves, or at least according to the French government. However, unknown to many is that not all forms of Islam require the use of headscarves, and that many Muslims chose not to wear them at all. Many women believe that they are unnecessary and chose not to wear them. If they believe they need a law to keep them away from the scarves, then they may as well not wear them at all, as many have. But for those who chose to wear them, it is their right to do so, and to restrict that right is unfair and inhumane. I personally believe that how one dresses, whether it be for fashion or for religion, should be his/her own discretion. I do not believe that the government has the right to tell anyone how they should or should not dress, it is their clothing and their choice.
In an idealistic world, one would not be judged by their clothing or by their culture, and limits would not be put on how one could or could not dress. Different cultures around the world have their very own individual customs and traditions, and it is not in anybody’s power to decide whose culture is superior or correct. Many people tend not to take things into perspective. Deciding that women have not the right to wear traditional headscarves is equivalent to saying that Canadians cannot wear our classic winter toques, or our knitted mittens our mothers made for us. It is intolerant of their own culture. Its intolerance like this that has caused wars, controversy, and also deaths. Ethnocentrism isn’t a thing to be toyed about, it’s a serious issue and laws like this encourage it. We as a global community must take a step forward and brush past the intolerance to unite ourselves a people. Intolerance is not only backwards, but a step in the wrong direction. We’ll never solve global issues such as poverty, war, and disparity if we cannot even accept others’ traditions and cultures. Banning the burka is backwards and unfair.
Alex MacRae
References:http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/editorials/bannings-not-the-answer/article1203532/http://www.monaeltahawy.com/blog/?p=143http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/opinion/05cope.html?_r=0http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1312016/Frances-Senate-bans-women-wearing-burka-public.htmlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/11/france-burqa-ban-takes-ef_n_847366.htmlhttp://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/has-the-burqa-ban-worked-in-france/http://www.violenceisnotourculture.org/content/europe-turkey-burqa-several-countries-prohibit-or-regulate
The Use of Biological Weapons in War
The use of biological weaponry has been used for sometime. Early forms of it could have included using poisonous plants or animals on darts, arrow heads, etc. or leading the enemy into a disease ridden part of the country. Unfortunately the strategy of using diseases and infectious plants/spores has become more dangerous because of the large amount of development in the area of technology. All though some people argue that the use of biological weaponry is infinitely safer than nuclear and chemical, I disagree. I believe that in the sense of the environmental impact, biological weapons are better than nuclear; However, with the improved technology and the greater possibility of the disease spreading into unwanted countries or areas, the chance of many unintended deaths/injuries is too high for any country to take the chance of using biological weapons.
Bioterrorism is involves the usage of diseases and toxins to weaken or kill an opposing country in warfare. Many of the organisms that are used in biological warfare are high infectious and can stay infectious for sometime. An example of one of these diseases could be anthrax (spores that, if not treated immediately, can cause respiratory failure) or smallpox (highly contagious spore that causes blisters all over the body). Because these diseases are highly infectious it is extremely easy for one out break to start very serious pandemic. This may not have been the case in the past but with the increase in travel to different parts of the world, there is a possibility of you not knowing you have a disease, and therefore spreading it to different countries without you knowing. Also, with the increase in technology and remote controlled devices, you could easily be infected with one of the typical (or non typical) microorganisms without your knowing and not knowing how you became infected in the first place. With these things, you can see that biological terrorism is a effective, dangerous method that people may be turning to in the near future.
As with any global issue, there are many viewpoints on the issue at hand. Here are just a few that have brought up the most controversy. Many people around the world believe that using biological weapons is better than the alternative/traditional ways to weaken, kill or injure an opposing force. When it comes to the environment, using biological weapons is better than the alternative (nuclear bombs, etc) because it would not pollute the air that everybody on this world breath. Unfortunately, it is possible that the disease/micro organism could affect the plant and animal life in the area that it was spread. This is could cause changes in other parts of the world if (for example) if migrating animals could no longer get their food source because it was contaminated/changed by the micro organism. This would affect the other organisms that lived off of the migrating animals, and so on, and so on. Other people believe that it is safer to transport biological weapons than the traditional. I have concluded that this is not the case. The nature of biological weaponry is to be discrete but also harm a fair number of people. When you are transporting a small but highly infectious and contagious spore/organism, you could easily infect yourself without even realizing it. Which could in turn, backfire on the country you were returning to, and infect them. War has always been a touchy subject and so naturally many people will have many opinions on the subject but I still stand by my view saying that we should not be using these types of weapons in war.
Deforestation
DEFORESTATION
Deforestation is a common global issue which many areas of the world face as it is destroying the earth's ecosystems although there are many positive benefits. This topic has some controversy as there are arguments from both sides. I believe that this global issue should be looked into further as it is the cause of many problems.
The reduction in Earth's forest commenced at least 8,000 years ago, when humans began to clear land to allow for easier hunting of wild animals. Deforestation is caused by humans cutting down forests for reasons such as to produce flat land or for farming, mining, livestock grazing, and urban development. The main cause of deforestation is agriculture. Farming is responsible for 48% of deforestation, commercial agriculture is responsible for 32% of deforestation; logging is responsible for 14% of deforestation and fuel wood removals make up 5% of deforestation. With the current rate of deforestation in a hundred years the world's main source of wood, the rainforests could vanish.
Deforestation has led to the extinction of numerous populations of animals. More than half of the animal and plant species in the world live in tropical forests. Animals such as three-toed sloths have become endangered because of humans cutting down trees. Many birds also rely on forests to make nests and hatch their young .Not only are we taking away animal homes but animals rely on trees as a food source whether they eat part of the trees or other species among them . The sloth is not the only animal affected by deforestation many other mammals, amphibians, insects and plants are endangered due to deforestation.
Deforestation is considered to be an important contributor to climate change and oxygen levels. Trees emit oxygen so the higher the deforestation level the less oxygen produced. When the trees are cut down the soil on the forest floor is not protected by the shade of the trees making the soil dried out and eventually turning forests to deserts.
Although there are many negative impacts people would argue it as not being an issue. People argue that it has many positive benefits. These could include benefits such as using trees to produce economic growth and development. It also allows countries to produce new jobs. It takes human labor to cut trees, ship them and to produce them into products. Others would also argue that it is good because it provides crucial resources like wood that can be used to build buildings and to make paper. Deforestation helps provide resources for many other countries that don't have forests by shipping them from countries that do.
The reduction in Earth's forest commenced at least 8,000 years ago, when humans began to clear land to allow for easier hunting of wild animals. Deforestation is caused by humans cutting down forests for reasons such as to produce flat land or for farming, mining, livestock grazing, and urban development. The main cause of deforestation is agriculture. Farming is responsible for 48% of deforestation, commercial agriculture is responsible for 32% of deforestation; logging is responsible for 14% of deforestation and fuel wood removals make up 5% of deforestation. With the current rate of deforestation in a hundred years the world's main source of wood, the rainforests could vanish.
Deforestation has led to the extinction of numerous populations of animals. More than half of the animal and plant species in the world live in tropical forests. Animals such as three-toed sloths have become endangered because of humans cutting down trees. Many birds also rely on forests to make nests and hatch their young .Not only are we taking away animal homes but animals rely on trees as a food source whether they eat part of the trees or other species among them . The sloth is not the only animal affected by deforestation many other mammals, amphibians, insects and plants are endangered due to deforestation.
Deforestation is considered to be an important contributor to climate change and oxygen levels. Trees emit oxygen so the higher the deforestation level the less oxygen produced. When the trees are cut down the soil on the forest floor is not protected by the shade of the trees making the soil dried out and eventually turning forests to deserts.
Although there are many negative impacts people would argue it as not being an issue. People argue that it has many positive benefits. These could include benefits such as using trees to produce economic growth and development. It also allows countries to produce new jobs. It takes human labor to cut trees, ship them and to produce them into products. Others would also argue that it is good because it provides crucial resources like wood that can be used to build buildings and to make paper. Deforestation helps provide resources for many other countries that don't have forests by shipping them from countries that do.
I believe that deforestation is a serious issue that should be addressed urgently although there are many positive benefits. People should take action on this issue because this resource will take a large amount labor and many years to replace. The deforestation process is also very dangerous and has many risks involved therefore if humans decreased the amount of deforestation than there would be a lower accident rate.
If this issue is not addressed than forests will diminish and numerous animal populations will be lost. Also there will be a huge oxygen decrease and a large climate change. Most facts about deforestation are negative therefore the topic should be looked into further. If each person does there part by recycling and reusing resources maybe it could impact a bigger change and create a more green future with more luscious green forests.
http://find.galegroup.com/gic/portalSearch.do?portalId=G1049&prodId=GIC&userGroupName=e
dmo88552&srchType=selected
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/deforestation-overview/
If this issue is not addressed than forests will diminish and numerous animal populations will be lost. Also there will be a huge oxygen decrease and a large climate change. Most facts about deforestation are negative therefore the topic should be looked into further. If each person does there part by recycling and reusing resources maybe it could impact a bigger change and create a more green future with more luscious green forests.
dmo88552&srchType=selected
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/deforestation-overview/
Airline Security
Airport and airline security are the methods that are taken to protect everyone, passengers and crew, from accidental or purposeful harm. Airline Security is a good, due to the level of protection that is in place so that you can not bring dangerous objects on to the aircraft; it is also bad because you can't bring many normal objects on the planes unless they are under a certain size because they might be dangerous like shampoos and lotions and nail files or they can only be sent through checked baggage only, like hockey sticks and fishing poles. To get through to your plane now a days, you have to go through several different scans and procedures, you have to go through a metal detector to make sure that you are carry any thing sharp or pointy, then send your bag through a check where they are able to see the contents and see if anything will cause harm to anyone aboard the plane. Plus your name is also sent through an international list called the no-fly list to see if your poses a threat to any countries, better hope your name doesn't match someone who is on the no-fly list or no plane trips for you. Airline security is been a big issue for some people because they say that it is too harsh, due to the no-fly list that even if your name match's that of someone who is on the list your not allowed on the plane and that you can not take normal objects such as a nail file on to the plane. Everyone has a different opinion on how the airline security should be run and on how tough it should be on certain things and I think that airline security should not be as tough as it is, like it should allow for someone to take their nail file on the plane.
 |
| The Beginning of Airline Security |
Airline security started back in the 1960's after there were a few hijacking. It didn't really get harsh until after the three terrorist attacks on the September 11, 2001, where terrorist hijacked four planes and then flew them into the World Trade Centre towers and the side of the Pentagon, the last plane was headed for the White house but crash landed by the passengers in a field in Pennsylvania. Shortly after 9/11 the United States form their no-fly list and began sharing with there allies. Some countries charge a small fee with the purchase of tickets to keep their no-fly list up and going. Everyone was feeling good about the levels of security that was in place at airports, you weren't allowed to bring dangerous weapons aboard, but then some how on the 25th of December in 2009 a young man got through security and got on to his plane with a bomb strapped to himself but he failed to exploded it properly. This attempted attack made the United States look into their security protocols and this lead them to the use of metal detectors and full body x ray scans. All countries with major airports now use the same technologies to detect dangerous objects and the United States decided that it was in the best interests of the whole world for them to share their no-fly list, and this way they also get names of potentially dangerous people from other countries that they don't know about yet. To get on the no-fly list you either had to pose a threat to international security at one point in their life, but when they first got the list started they where putting names on the list if the person had a super low or really bad credit score.
 |
| No- Fly list Logo |
Some people from around the world saying that the extreme amounts of security are an invasion of privacy because it has strangers going through their personal belonging to see if there is anything dangerous among their things. They think that it should just be enough for them to send it through a metal detector and then if the metal detector goes off then give them free right to look through the stuff. There is also much controversy on the no-fly list, there are many people that believe that it was a bad idea because if there are multiple people with the same names then they will run into problems if the other person with that name is on the list. There was an eighteen-month old baby who had the same name as someone on the list, security at the airport said that the child was not allowed to go through due to the fact that his name was on the list. The child and his parents were taken in by security and questioned and after hours of his parents arguing with security about the fact that their baby was not a terrorist, they were let go and by that point they had missed their flight.
 |
| Airport Security |
I believe that airline security is in place for a reason and if the guards what to search my stuff before I go through to the plane then so be it, I want to be safe and I want to know that I am safe. The guards at the airport are only allowed to take something that they thing will cause damage or could be used as a weapon, so its not like they are just going to take some money from my stuff. I also think that people should be okay with having security checking there things unless they have something to hide from the guards that they think might be dangerous or they know will be taken away from them at the gate. I do think that maybe they should be a little more easy going about taking things on board like a nail file or nail clippers, cause you can't cause hardly any damage to a person with a nail file.
I believe that that the no-fly list should have some work done on it, like maybe they should a little more solid evidence on whether or not they are a threat to international security, because not everyone with a bad credit score will be a terrorist, some may have good credit scores. Terrorist are generally pretty intelligent and some have even gone to school in the states and then they go back and blow it later.
After extensive research I still think that airport security is a good thing because it provides us with great protection when we are on the plane because being in that small enclosed space for extended periods of time you want to know that there is nobody on there that might try to fly you into a build purposefully or blow up the plane mid-flight. I also still think that they should be a little more relaxed about what is being allowed on to the plane. My points of view wouldn't change society at all because I do like the way that things are being done at the airports right now, it makes me feel safe and secure.
Biblography:
Obesity
Obesity
Obesity is a daily struggle for about 7% (7 billion people) of our worlds population. There are different perspectives on the issue as can be expected while dealing with something global. Some people believe that being overweight is caused purely by genetics while others believe it is caused by overeating. There are also different views as to how it should be fixed, such as using laxatives or liposuction. Some believe it should be done naturally with simply dieting and exercising, others believe that healthy eating on its own is the way to go. Maybe this is why our world has come to what it is now, everyone has a different view on every issue. In my opinion obesity is an issue that needs to be dealt with in a healthy way using things such as the food pyramid and exercise. I don’t believe that medications and diets are good for us, unless prescribed by a doctor, because our body isn’t used to it and may end up hurting us more in the long run. A person is considered when their body mass index, a measure obtained by measuring a person's weight in kilograms divided by the square of a persons height in meters, exceeds 30kg/m2. Obesity results in genetic, metabolic, environmental, and behavioural issues. It is the buildup of fat in your body that quickly increases your risk of diseases and health problems and can also take years off your life. Heart disease and diabetes are two of the main health issues caused by being overweight. Our heart is a muscle that circulates blood through our body. It is the system that carries oxygen and nutrients to our other systems and organs. Obesity interferes with this because the volume the persons blood goes up, meaning that the heart has to pump a greater volume of blood with each heartbeat. This puts strain on the heart over time and makes the person more prone to heart failure. Obesity can cause diabetes, which is a condition where the cells are unable to use insulin to convert sugar into energy, so the sugar stays in the blood stream. When we eat our pancreas releases insulin which allows us to use sugar as energy, when people are diabetic this system doesn’t work properly.
Many people believe that obesity is caused by genetics, which is not entirely true, no one is destined to be obese. Depending on genetics, some people have a higher chance of being overweight than others. For instance when a child is born to two overweight parents they are more likely to have a weight problem than a child born to two average parents. Your parents influence your eating choices as well so that also plays a factor in your weight. Some parents teach their children healthy eating habits accompanied by physical activity, usually a sport. Other parents are more laid back and maybe even lazy, they don’t make healthy meals and snacks for their children or bother to get them involved in physical activity. This may not seem to be affecting them on the outside while their young but it builds bad habits that will affect them when they're older and living on their own.
In my opinion obesity is mainly the result of poor life choices. So many people don’t make an effort to get the recommended 30 minutes of exercise every day. I find this unreasonable considering it isn’t even a full hour of their day, everyone should be able to make at least that much time. Nowadays we buy too many convenient processed foods that have no nutritional value. Foods like this often give us a short energy burst followed by a “crash” meaning we are very tired, this isn’t good for our body physically and nutritionally. I am personally very health concious and I love exercise, therefore it’s difficult not to judge these people now and then. I often wonder how they let themselves get to that point, I guess we don’t realize how easy it is to slip into that lifestyle. I read an article about a doctors thoughts on obesity and in the article he said “Obesity just leads to disability.” I agree with him on that completely, if someone chooses that they are going to eat unhealthy and not exercise then that is purely their choice, however it will lead to problems in the future.
Everyone should concerned about obesity to some extent because people are dying of problems caused by obesity every day. The world health statistics state that one in six adults are obese and one in ten are diabetic. It also says that one in three adults have raised blood pressure which is the leading cause of stroke and death rates at 45%. These statistics alone should be enough to motivate our society to change. However, according to the world health organization obesity rates have increased by three times in the western world since the 1980’s. Obesity rates are on the rise and the burden on our healthcare system could one day be unbearable.
Obesity impacts the people dealing with it, the people helping them, family members, and friends of the person with the problem. It affects everyday life for these people, it can make seemingly simple tasks such as walking up the stairs, standing for a longer period of time and physical labour associated with a job difficult. These people often have low self esteem and as a result aren't happy with themselves physically and, in some cases emotionally. Obesity didn’t just appear randomly. It has been rising since about the 1980’s and is now at epidemic proportions.
Obesity can start with simply eating unhealthy every now and then, then making a bad habit of it. These fats and calories add up more quickly than most people realize. It became a global issue when more and more people started having to deal with it.
In our fast paced society the rate of obesity is only going to increase. Strain is put on our heart when dealing with obesity and our probability of getting diabetes is greater. Obesity is not caused by genetics however our parents do play a large role in our lifestyle. Physical exercise and healthy eating is key to leading a good life. The rates of obesity are continuously increasing and making good choices is the only way we can hope change that. Processed foods have become easier to access and increasingly tempting in our busy lifestyles. All of these things affect our everyday life so if we want change we need to be the change we want to see in the world.
References
http://find.galegroup.com/gic/docRetrieve.do?searchPageType=BasicSearchForm&inPS=true&prodId=GIC&userGroupName=edmo88552&docId=CP3208520080
http://bodyandhealth.canada.com/channel_condition_info_details.asp?channel_id=1055&disease_id=95&relation_id=17519
http://www.who.int/topics/obesity/en/
https://www.google.ca/search?q=background+information+on+obesity&aq=1&oq=background+information+on+ob&sugexp=chrome,mod=12&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/health_advice/facts/obesity.htm
http://www.sharecare.com/question/how-obesity-affect-heart-muscle
http://find.galegroup.com/gic/docRetrieve.do?searchPageType=BasicSearchForm&inPS=true&prodId=GIC&userGroupName=edmo88552&docId=CP3208520080
http://bodyandhealth.canada.com/channel_condition_info_details.asp?channel_id=1055&disease_id=95&relation_id=17519
http://www.who.int/topics/obesity/en/
https://www.google.ca/search?q=background+information+on+obesity&aq=1&oq=background+information+on+ob&sugexp=chrome,mod=12&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/health_advice/facts/obesity.htm
http://www.sharecare.com/question/how-obesity-affect-heart-muscle
Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy is a technology that has the ability to either bring an end to life as we know it in the form of a bomb or to provide us with a clean reliable energy source for many years to come in the form of a reactor. Nuclear power by definition is the generation of heat and electricity through the process of fission. As our global community continues to deplete our fossil fuel resources the debate on nuclear power is rising. Due to dangerous carbon dioxide emissions the global community is looking to find an alternative clean energy source like nuclear. With the continued rise in the world’s population and the resulting increase in demand for energy to fuel the economic growth of developing countries, nuclear power must be considered as a viable and productive option for the world’s energy crisis. Nuclear power has the potential to be one of the key answers to both our provincial and global clean energy crisis, but it comes at a price and the question we must ask ourselves is the price too high?
The history of nuclear energy goes back to early 20th century work of nuclear physicists. From early research came nuclear fission which was discovered in WWII by German scientists. It was however at this time not considered as a source of energy to fuel the world but rather as a means of creating atomic weapons to be used in war for mass destruction. Post WWII scientists focused on the process of nuclear fission to create nuclear power for commercial use primarily with uranium. Nuclear fission is the process whereby the nucleus of an atom is split into two smaller nuclei. This process releases a large amount of energy that if properly harnessed could energize our world carbon free. In the world today there are 435 nuclear power plants located in 31 different countries. However, nuclear power is still only a supplement to traditional fossil fuel energy globally.
Nuclear energy discussions often evoke great debate. Many people believe that nuclear energy poses a huge threat to life on earth with the chance of a reactor melting down and releasing its radioactive waste. For example, the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986 proved to be a horrific example of what can happen if an accident occurs when dealing with volatile nuclear material. Nuclear power plants are also accused of thermal pollution as they take cold water from rivers or lakes and return warm water to them potentially disrupting these ecosystems. As well, nuclear plants are very capital intensive to build, take a very long time to complete and have a lifespan of only 30 years before the reactor must be decommissioned. Perhaps worst of all, the waste nuclear plants produce remain radioactive for thousands of years and must be stored in a carefully controlled environment. Should this waste ever leach out it could contaminate water supplies, crops and cause massive destruction to the environment. But there is a positive side to nuclear energy. Nuclear power plants use much less fuel than traditional coal burning power plants. For example 200 tons of uranium will produce the same amount of power as three million tons of coal. Because of the immense heat generated from the fission process, nuclear plants can create huge amounts of electricity as compared to other alternative energy sources. And the biggest benefit of nuclear power plants is in regards to reduced carbon emissions. Nuclear power plants do not release harmful pollutants like carbon dioxide into the air in comparison to fossil fuel burning power plants which release hundreds of tons of pollutants into the air each year. Some of which are known to cause cancer in addition to contributing to global warming.
Nuclear energy is a clean reliable source of energy that needs to be used more readily. We have relied far too long on our fossil fuel supply and the time is now to plan for our future by building more nuclear power plants. The controversy surrounding the safety of nuclear power has been heightened recently due to the Fukushima power plant disaster in Japan. Although there have been other accidents with nuclear plants in the past, the chance of a major incident happening is still considered to be very low. It has been estimated that the number of deaths caused by nuclear power plant accidents averages out at about only45 per year. When compared to coal burning plants which account for over 10,000 deaths per year as a result of the pollutants that they emit. The advantage of using nuclear power is that it is 100% man made and controlled. Whereas other clean energy sources like wind power for example are dependent on uncontrollable variables like the weather.Global warming is a serious concern and the continued heavy use of fossil fuels is not helping this problem.
Compared to other forms of clean energy such as wind, hydro, geothermal and solar, nuclear energy is currently our only clean option that can produce large amounts of electricity while being carbon free. With increased use of nuclear energy the world’s dependence on fossil fuels can dramatically reduce harmful emissions. Although nuclear energy has had its problems it would be a good start in our objective towards reducing our carbon footprint within Alberta. The construction of nuclear power plants would create a demand for labour therefore potentially boosting the economy. We need to start relying on nuclear power more and less on traditional coal burning power generation plants. It’s time to take a stand for a cleaner, greener future for not only Alberta, but for the entire world and give nuclear energy a chance. Global warming and illness related to fossil fuels are preventable. The price we are paying is too high to not consider nuclear energy.
By: Jacob Mcintyre
Sources:
http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?failOverType=&query=&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&mode=view&displayGroupName=Reference&limiter=&currPage=&disableHighlighting=true&source=&sortBy=&displayGroups=&action=e&catId=GALE%7C00000000LVY0&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7CPC3021900118
http://find.galegroup.com/gic/docRetrieve.do?searchPageType=BasicSearchForm&inPS=true&prodId=GIC&userGroupName=albertak12&docId=CP3208520079
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fission
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3691
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption
http://www.digplanet.com/wiki/Nuclear_power
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)