I believe Morgan Spurlock, in his documentary SuperSize Me, was trying to educate us as to the dangers of the fast food we are presented with as sustenance in everyday life. The habits of Americans to be on the go has made brands, such as McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy’s, to name just a few, an important though extremely unhealthy substitute to the good old American home cooked meals. The impacts of this replacement to the well balances means that we are the most overweight country in the world with incredibly high rates of heart disease and obesity, which in turn, could impact the higher costs of health care in our country.
Whose responsibility is obesity in America? Are companies, such as McDonalds or Burger King, to be held responsible or should they be pressured into changing the products they offer to be more healthy? In a free enterprise system, the consumer is really what drives the products offered. In other words, it is our lifestyles or choices which keep McDonalds and Burger King in business. If we wanted more healthy offerings, we would demand this. With free enterprise, companies offer products which consumers will consume. If a product doesn’t sell, the company will alter their offerings in order to demand greater dollar expenditure from the consumer. If consumers are still not interested in the products offered by a company, eventually the company will go out of business. As of today, McDonalds is a fortune 500 company with little chance of going out of business. They are also a global company which is continuously expanding into new territory. How can we place the blame for our consuming habits on the company which provides us with the goods and services we prefer?
Morgan’s documentary was a beautiful way to show exactly what happens when we disregard the basic notions of self-discipline and everything in moderation. I believe his visits to the doctor should have been an awakening to anybody who visits McDonalds more than once or twice a month. It should be required viewing from sixth through twelfth grades and at least once in every college throughout our country. The evidence is compelling we should refrain from eating foods which such high fat, high carbohydrate and cholesterol contents. I am not sure anybody with a reasonable degree of intelligence could dispute this notion after viewing the movie.
The tactics employed by McDonalds as far as brand recognition appeared to be catchy jingles, which many of us, to this day, can still rattle off from the top of our heads. “Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles on a sesame seed bun.” “Have it your way, at Burger King”, “I’d like to teach the world to sing, in perfect harmony” and the all time classic “Where’s the beef!??” are just a few catchy brand recognition jingles I can remember from my childhood. It is the desire of the company for us to become immune and forget thinking about products and what they mean and to simply drive down the road, take note of the golden arches and stop in for a quick meal for the family. Supersize, biggie fries, value menu – all carefully named to make us feel our money goes the distance in nurturing our hungry families.
Solving the problem of obesity in America starts with educating our children at home and at our schools. At home, were we to make healthy snacks available and promote well balanced diets to our children, the levels of child obesity would eventually go down. Can we somehow show that poorer or less educated children are more likely to be overweight and can we make a correlation between this lack of economic opportunity and a lesser quality of education to childhood and adolescent obesity? Once the cycle of obesity starts, I believe that it is not difficult to propagate these tendencies to adults. It must start young and be promoted in both a healthy home and by our educational institutions.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Friday, April 6, 2007
And the global warming saga continues...
According to MSNBC.com, a panel has reached a final draft on the global warming accord. However, the final draft was reached after intense negotiation with the US, China and Saudi Arabia.
Which leads to me to this question. How can an accord be reached after 'negotiations'? Don't negotiations taint the process altogether? Either there is a problem or there isn't. How can we negotiate the facts?
The story can be viewed online here. I am not sure how I feel and sort of agree with the pissed off scientists who say they will never participate in such a conference again. There is no room for negotiation when we consider the future of the planet and of the fragility of our existence as inhabitants of the planet.
I'll now step off my high horse and again, defer to my previous stated plan for my future - do what I can based on the level of responsibility I feel for contributing raised levels of green house gases. Wish me luck!
Which leads to me to this question. How can an accord be reached after 'negotiations'? Don't negotiations taint the process altogether? Either there is a problem or there isn't. How can we negotiate the facts?
The story can be viewed online here. I am not sure how I feel and sort of agree with the pissed off scientists who say they will never participate in such a conference again. There is no room for negotiation when we consider the future of the planet and of the fragility of our existence as inhabitants of the planet.
I'll now step off my high horse and again, defer to my previous stated plan for my future - do what I can based on the level of responsibility I feel for contributing raised levels of green house gases. Wish me luck!
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Interview Questions for Jeremy Heft
Aaron Frizzell
Instructor Dr. James Hepworth
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Background:
I am doing a research paper for Ethics & Ecology in my final semester at Lewis-Clark State College. With recent events surrounding Idaho’s desire to delist the gray wolf, I would like to revisit educating the public about the gray wolf and wild animals in general and how best to approach documentary photography and videography. In my years working with the Wolf Education & Research Center, I have adopted what I feel is a responsible approach to photographing wild animals.
Many of the questions we’ll be discussing today are going to be focused on the documentary Grizzly Man by Timothy Treadwell. After seeing the movie, I recalled the work we did with the Sawtooth Wolf Pack: Wolves of the Nez Perce. I remember, in particular, the training I received from you regarding how, in close contact, your job as pack manager and our encounters with the wolves inside the enclosure was to be conducted with the best interest of the wolf pack members in mind. Additionally, the procedures you implemented pertaining to greeting the wolves were to be done in such a manner that we would approach the pack members, allowing them a chance to get acquainted with the handlers.
Would you please give me some information about your background such as where you went to college, what types of work have you done as a biologist and how you came about working for the Wolf Education & Research Center (WERC) here in Winchester?
How long have you been working at WERC?
How did you arrive at your procedures for close contact with the members of the Sawtooth Wolf Pack?
Have your procedures as it relates to close contact with the pack members evolved as you observed the reactions of the wolves to contact with the staff of WERC? If so, what were some of the signs you observed from either the behavior of the wolves of through the behavior of the handlers?
Would you share your opinion as it relates to the close contact Timothy Treadwell had with the brown bears during his filming of the documentary? Specifically, do you feel the bears had grown accustomed to Timothy’s presence and tolerated that presence or do you believe the bears were showing signs of stress?
In your own words, how would you describe Mr. Treadwell’s style or approach to the filming of the documentary?
Do you agree or disagree with this style or approach?
What do you think was Mr. Treadwell’s goal when he began filming the documentary?
Do you feel his goal was maintained throughout the footage you saw or do you feel his goal changed as the footage continued through several seasons with the bears?
What is your primary goal as a biologist?
When your partnership with WERC ends, what area would you like to explore next as it pertains to biology?
Instructor Dr. James Hepworth
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Background:
I am doing a research paper for Ethics & Ecology in my final semester at Lewis-Clark State College. With recent events surrounding Idaho’s desire to delist the gray wolf, I would like to revisit educating the public about the gray wolf and wild animals in general and how best to approach documentary photography and videography. In my years working with the Wolf Education & Research Center, I have adopted what I feel is a responsible approach to photographing wild animals.
Many of the questions we’ll be discussing today are going to be focused on the documentary Grizzly Man by Timothy Treadwell. After seeing the movie, I recalled the work we did with the Sawtooth Wolf Pack: Wolves of the Nez Perce. I remember, in particular, the training I received from you regarding how, in close contact, your job as pack manager and our encounters with the wolves inside the enclosure was to be conducted with the best interest of the wolf pack members in mind. Additionally, the procedures you implemented pertaining to greeting the wolves were to be done in such a manner that we would approach the pack members, allowing them a chance to get acquainted with the handlers.
Would you please give me some information about your background such as where you went to college, what types of work have you done as a biologist and how you came about working for the Wolf Education & Research Center (WERC) here in Winchester?
How long have you been working at WERC?
How did you arrive at your procedures for close contact with the members of the Sawtooth Wolf Pack?
Have your procedures as it relates to close contact with the pack members evolved as you observed the reactions of the wolves to contact with the staff of WERC? If so, what were some of the signs you observed from either the behavior of the wolves of through the behavior of the handlers?
Would you share your opinion as it relates to the close contact Timothy Treadwell had with the brown bears during his filming of the documentary? Specifically, do you feel the bears had grown accustomed to Timothy’s presence and tolerated that presence or do you believe the bears were showing signs of stress?
In your own words, how would you describe Mr. Treadwell’s style or approach to the filming of the documentary?
Do you agree or disagree with this style or approach?
What do you think was Mr. Treadwell’s goal when he began filming the documentary?
Do you feel his goal was maintained throughout the footage you saw or do you feel his goal changed as the footage continued through several seasons with the bears?
What is your primary goal as a biologist?
When your partnership with WERC ends, what area would you like to explore next as it pertains to biology?
Monday, March 26, 2007
Topic Proposal
I am interested in conservation through the use of documentary videography or through the use of photography. In particular, I am interested in educating the public of the values and the need for the gray wolf as a valuable addition to our ecosystem. Perhaps some of my admiration for the gray wolf comes from my childhood but I cannot put a finger on exactly what it was that sparked my interest in wolves.
I had the opportunity to work with the Sawtooth Pack: Wolves of the Nez Perce during my stay in the Lewis-Clark Valley. I have had the opportunity to join the biologist and staff of the Wolf Education & Research Center in Winchester on several occasions as they entered the enclosure with the pack members. Watching The Grizzly Man documentary, I found that I disagreed with the style of documentary Mr. Treadwell used when he was introducing us to the brown bears of Alaska. I knew before the end of the movie that Mr. Treadwell was going to die as a result of his style and tactics he displayed.
I would like to do a little research as to what is the ‘correct’ way to produce a documentary which involves wild animals. Specifically, there is a certain amount of stress involved with the wild animals anytime the animals come in close proximity to humans while the animal is in it’s native environment. Is there a responsible way to go about creating a documentary? Should the conservationist watch for specific signs from the animals they are photographing or documenting which leads the conservationist to say ‘perhaps I am no longer doing good here and I should leave the animals alone?’
Through my interview with Jeremy Heft, biologist and pack manager for the Wolf Education & Research Center, I hope to be able to arrive at some type of answer.
I had the opportunity to work with the Sawtooth Pack: Wolves of the Nez Perce during my stay in the Lewis-Clark Valley. I have had the opportunity to join the biologist and staff of the Wolf Education & Research Center in Winchester on several occasions as they entered the enclosure with the pack members. Watching The Grizzly Man documentary, I found that I disagreed with the style of documentary Mr. Treadwell used when he was introducing us to the brown bears of Alaska. I knew before the end of the movie that Mr. Treadwell was going to die as a result of his style and tactics he displayed.
I would like to do a little research as to what is the ‘correct’ way to produce a documentary which involves wild animals. Specifically, there is a certain amount of stress involved with the wild animals anytime the animals come in close proximity to humans while the animal is in it’s native environment. Is there a responsible way to go about creating a documentary? Should the conservationist watch for specific signs from the animals they are photographing or documenting which leads the conservationist to say ‘perhaps I am no longer doing good here and I should leave the animals alone?’
Through my interview with Jeremy Heft, biologist and pack manager for the Wolf Education & Research Center, I hope to be able to arrive at some type of answer.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
'An Inconvenient Truth' response - from PETA and yet another personal response
I am not kidding here... If you follow the link I am going to provide to you then you should feel that I am a hypocrite. Public enemy #1!
Ok, more background.
After my Al Gore 'hypocrite' rant, I've been watching for the response which should restore balance in my world. During class yesterday, I was aware that PETA had responded to the Inconvenient Truth story and all the other stuff we're hearing about these days. As far as I know, many in our class are monitoring the stories and studies about global warming.
Presently, I am eating a very good coffee rubbed rib-eye steak covered in mushrooms and onions. It's very good. Simoultaneously, I am watching Glenn Beck on CNN and Glenn had a representative from PETA on the program.
It seems that PETA sent a letter to Al Gore, stating that he should turn vegetarian if he really wants to make an impact on global warming. States that eating meat, cows in particular (remember, I'm chomping on a rib-eye presently...and it is REALLY GOOD) helps to support pumping more green house gases than... well, lots of stuff, including driving to California.
No shit!??! In order to be responsible, I can eat nothing but veggies and tofu in order to appear not to be a hypocrite?
Anyway, here is the article:
Glenn Beck - The Real Story, March 8. 2007
That's it! Call ME a hypocrite. I am NOT giving up beef! It's what's for dinner!
I remember being blissfully ignorant before I signed up for this class. I remember doing the right thing based on my value system and how I was raised.
We have asked us to pay attention to the news and current events and to speak up, to write. I have done my best to do just that. However, as you may have noted in my first post online, I was under the impression that being less controversial would be better in the promotion of my business.
I've found that there appears to be more at stake than future potential income. I have tried to take a stand on one side or the other and to not adopt a neutral stance.
I am going to re-iterate something I stated once before. I don't think is in the best interest of my college completion, but Dr. H., you're telling us to speak up, so here it goes.
Speaking out is not going to work for me. I am too fickle or my mind is too feeble for me to see what you see when each of us read the literature in this class. I don’t mind reading it as the views sometimes differ from those of my own. Heck, I don’t even understand much of what I read until we discuss it in class. However, there is so much information available these days from people with a great deal more education than I have and, depending on the source, and I don't know what to believe anymore. I am skeptical, which I learned from Introduction to Natural Science (NS 150). You have a doctorate degree and were more than just a little off base when you mentioned American vehicles and sales in China based on what you told us in class (Where does knowledge come from? - February 9, 2007). I don't like to feel foolish when I discuss what I ‘learned’ in class.
I was questioned as to my comment that 'blacks [slaves] were Americans by proxy'. Based on your reaction to my comment, I wondered if I should again feel foolish. I immediately questioned my understanding of the word or phrase. After looking up a definition of proxy, my feelings are just that – what I feel, and I feel I'm right. Had a slave been asked, shortly after arriving on the shores of America, if s/he wanted to stay or go back to his/her family, his/her home in Africa and the only way of life blacks knew at that time, you have to be kidding if you think the slave would have said 'I would like to stay, break free from my master and go find a wilderness to live in here in the colonies because I will then be free!' Not a chance. The slave didn’t have a voice in the matter and the decision for what was in his or her best interest was to be enslaved and to work on the plantation, or what was in the interest of the master. The slave didn't have rights – the choice was work or die. A slave wasn't even considered human. How can s/he grasp the idea of wilderness? I am certain, however, that all slaves had a FIRM grasp on the concept of FREEDOM. Freedom, in its most primitive form, was the feeling they had six months prior to their arrival on the colonial soil, give or take a month.
My discussion thus far leads me to the discussion on race. I may have been heard saying race is an idea that we, as humans, promote and keep alive. Abby said it very well that our genus, homo-sapien, are created genetically the same. Race is then, by its definition, a socio-economic necessity in order to project superiority through nothing more than words. Lo and behold, around the 17th century, some fothe fist scientific explanations for the word race were introduced to coincide with imperialism and colonialism. African-Americans, Blacks, niggers, anglo-saxon, white, whities, honkeys, jews, italians, kikes, spaniards, spics, polacks – there are more words but they all clearly associate our minds to race and the words mean absolutely nothing unless we associate them with race. However, wars have been started and millions have died as a result of race and religion. This ideal is ridiculous but what am I going to be able to do to change even one persons opinion about the subject? Nothing! I am able, however, to quietly teach my children that there is more to think about.
In order for change to take place, there really isn't anything I can do, alone, to change what is happening around me. I can’t do it alone and there are those more intelligent and eloquent than I to institute change. I will throw my support behind them and agree and disagree with what I see for those brave enough to take a stand, to speak up. I am too meek, weak or scared to institute any significant change by speaking up and taking a stance. I want to be anonymous, staying out of the spotlight. I want to continue to judge right and wrong based on my socialization and through self-realization. I will do my best to teach my children and those around me to do the same. I cannot lead but I will also not follow. I simply don’t want to stand on the front line. I don't know who or what to believe these days.
I have allowed myself to be moved, to be motivated by the idea that global warming is happening and I, we, have to do something about it, now, or certainly perish through a long, unpleasant, horrific death (no, wait, my grandchildren or their grandchildren are going to suffer, is that right?). However, after plunging myself into this firestorm and others storms since class started, I realize that after my frothy frenzies I have whipped myself into, I am most comfortable, in my mind, leading by example right where I started before this semester began. In my heart and mind, I was doing the right thing to begin with.
Work Cited
Race. Wikipedia..
Ok, more background.
After my Al Gore 'hypocrite' rant, I've been watching for the response which should restore balance in my world. During class yesterday, I was aware that PETA had responded to the Inconvenient Truth story and all the other stuff we're hearing about these days. As far as I know, many in our class are monitoring the stories and studies about global warming.
Presently, I am eating a very good coffee rubbed rib-eye steak covered in mushrooms and onions. It's very good. Simoultaneously, I am watching Glenn Beck on CNN and Glenn had a representative from PETA on the program.
It seems that PETA sent a letter to Al Gore, stating that he should turn vegetarian if he really wants to make an impact on global warming. States that eating meat, cows in particular (remember, I'm chomping on a rib-eye presently...and it is REALLY GOOD) helps to support pumping more green house gases than... well, lots of stuff, including driving to California.
No shit!??! In order to be responsible, I can eat nothing but veggies and tofu in order to appear not to be a hypocrite?
Anyway, here is the article:
Glenn Beck - The Real Story, March 8. 2007
That's it! Call ME a hypocrite. I am NOT giving up beef! It's what's for dinner!
I remember being blissfully ignorant before I signed up for this class. I remember doing the right thing based on my value system and how I was raised.
We have asked us to pay attention to the news and current events and to speak up, to write. I have done my best to do just that. However, as you may have noted in my first post online, I was under the impression that being less controversial would be better in the promotion of my business.
I've found that there appears to be more at stake than future potential income. I have tried to take a stand on one side or the other and to not adopt a neutral stance.
I am going to re-iterate something I stated once before. I don't think is in the best interest of my college completion, but Dr. H., you're telling us to speak up, so here it goes.
Speaking out is not going to work for me. I am too fickle or my mind is too feeble for me to see what you see when each of us read the literature in this class. I don’t mind reading it as the views sometimes differ from those of my own. Heck, I don’t even understand much of what I read until we discuss it in class. However, there is so much information available these days from people with a great deal more education than I have and, depending on the source, and I don't know what to believe anymore. I am skeptical, which I learned from Introduction to Natural Science (NS 150). You have a doctorate degree and were more than just a little off base when you mentioned American vehicles and sales in China based on what you told us in class (Where does knowledge come from? - February 9, 2007). I don't like to feel foolish when I discuss what I ‘learned’ in class.
I was questioned as to my comment that 'blacks [slaves] were Americans by proxy'. Based on your reaction to my comment, I wondered if I should again feel foolish. I immediately questioned my understanding of the word or phrase. After looking up a definition of proxy, my feelings are just that – what I feel, and I feel I'm right. Had a slave been asked, shortly after arriving on the shores of America, if s/he wanted to stay or go back to his/her family, his/her home in Africa and the only way of life blacks knew at that time, you have to be kidding if you think the slave would have said 'I would like to stay, break free from my master and go find a wilderness to live in here in the colonies because I will then be free!' Not a chance. The slave didn’t have a voice in the matter and the decision for what was in his or her best interest was to be enslaved and to work on the plantation, or what was in the interest of the master. The slave didn't have rights – the choice was work or die. A slave wasn't even considered human. How can s/he grasp the idea of wilderness? I am certain, however, that all slaves had a FIRM grasp on the concept of FREEDOM. Freedom, in its most primitive form, was the feeling they had six months prior to their arrival on the colonial soil, give or take a month.
My discussion thus far leads me to the discussion on race. I may have been heard saying race is an idea that we, as humans, promote and keep alive. Abby said it very well that our genus, homo-sapien, are created genetically the same. Race is then, by its definition, a socio-economic necessity in order to project superiority through nothing more than words. Lo and behold, around the 17th century, some fothe fist scientific explanations for the word race were introduced to coincide with imperialism and colonialism. African-Americans, Blacks, niggers, anglo-saxon, white, whities, honkeys, jews, italians, kikes, spaniards, spics, polacks – there are more words but they all clearly associate our minds to race and the words mean absolutely nothing unless we associate them with race. However, wars have been started and millions have died as a result of race and religion. This ideal is ridiculous but what am I going to be able to do to change even one persons opinion about the subject? Nothing! I am able, however, to quietly teach my children that there is more to think about.
In order for change to take place, there really isn't anything I can do, alone, to change what is happening around me. I can’t do it alone and there are those more intelligent and eloquent than I to institute change. I will throw my support behind them and agree and disagree with what I see for those brave enough to take a stand, to speak up. I am too meek, weak or scared to institute any significant change by speaking up and taking a stance. I want to be anonymous, staying out of the spotlight. I want to continue to judge right and wrong based on my socialization and through self-realization. I will do my best to teach my children and those around me to do the same. I cannot lead but I will also not follow. I simply don’t want to stand on the front line. I don't know who or what to believe these days.
I have allowed myself to be moved, to be motivated by the idea that global warming is happening and I, we, have to do something about it, now, or certainly perish through a long, unpleasant, horrific death (no, wait, my grandchildren or their grandchildren are going to suffer, is that right?). However, after plunging myself into this firestorm and others storms since class started, I realize that after my frothy frenzies I have whipped myself into, I am most comfortable, in my mind, leading by example right where I started before this semester began. In my heart and mind, I was doing the right thing to begin with.
Work Cited
Race. Wikipedia.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
And the Oscar goes to..
Documentary feature
“An Inconvenient Truth”
I am not sure what significance this has been it won an Oscar.
Go figure...
“An Inconvenient Truth”
I am not sure what significance this has been it won an Oscar.
Go figure...
Friday, February 23, 2007
Study Questions: Grizzly Man
I am not sure I can respond to Dr. Hepworth's questions in an objective manner. I don't really view myself as a conservationist though I have been involved with efforts involving conservation. I don't agree with the approach Treadwell took in his efforts at conservation. At the same time, I have to give him credit for giving his efforts the college try.
I gained some insight from our conversation we had Wednesday in clsas. I like to think that I see things but when we discussed the movie in class, I realize some of my views are fairly well polarized and I don't see beyond my own nose. Therefore, some of my responses to these questions will be based on what I heard in class and my fresh perspective on Treadwell's efforts at conservation.
Treadwell, as others pointed out in their discussion, viewed himself as the savior or protector of these particular bears. This strikes me as true, to a certain extent, if the number of poaches went down while he was 'on watch'. He only visited the island for part of each year, however, so if the numbers went up after he left the island to return home, he was their protector. Perhaps a flawed way of looking at this but it's only a blog.
The bears were certainly not Treadwell's friends, though I suspect he may have felt very differently. As I pointed out in class, I saw that the bears were farly intolerant of Treadwell's presence, as noted on many occasions throughout the presentation. Treadwell was encroaching on nature in the purest form by actually interfering with the natural instincts of the bears. In the movie, the one reasonable footage I saw was during the bear brawl, where Treadwell waited until the end of the fight before approaching and long after the bears had left. Smart move, so he wasn't stupid, by any means. I don't necessarily think that naming bears is a bad thing. People associate things by recognition and I believe it would be perfectly natural to name that which you identify with.
As I pointed out in class, Treadwell no doubt raised awareness of the bears in Alaska. Through his public engagements and appearances, he was certainly an integral part in fund raising activities for the Grizzly People, though to what extent I am not aware without further resarch. With a public image so notorious and extravagent, I am sure the Grizzly People welcomed many contributions from supportes throughout the United States, Cananda and the world, no doubt. However, I am sure he offended just as many people, if not more, through his actions in Alaska. As I said earlier, I do not agree with the way in which Treadwell went about his conservation efforts as it pertained to the way he was filming his documentary and his interactions with wildlife, including the coyotes which frequented his campsite. Desensitizing wildlife in this way makes them much less wary of humans and can only lead to eventual trouble, in many circumstances, once the natural distrust has left a wild animal.
I gained some insight from our conversation we had Wednesday in clsas. I like to think that I see things but when we discussed the movie in class, I realize some of my views are fairly well polarized and I don't see beyond my own nose. Therefore, some of my responses to these questions will be based on what I heard in class and my fresh perspective on Treadwell's efforts at conservation.
Treadwell, as others pointed out in their discussion, viewed himself as the savior or protector of these particular bears. This strikes me as true, to a certain extent, if the number of poaches went down while he was 'on watch'. He only visited the island for part of each year, however, so if the numbers went up after he left the island to return home, he was their protector. Perhaps a flawed way of looking at this but it's only a blog.
The bears were certainly not Treadwell's friends, though I suspect he may have felt very differently. As I pointed out in class, I saw that the bears were farly intolerant of Treadwell's presence, as noted on many occasions throughout the presentation. Treadwell was encroaching on nature in the purest form by actually interfering with the natural instincts of the bears. In the movie, the one reasonable footage I saw was during the bear brawl, where Treadwell waited until the end of the fight before approaching and long after the bears had left. Smart move, so he wasn't stupid, by any means. I don't necessarily think that naming bears is a bad thing. People associate things by recognition and I believe it would be perfectly natural to name that which you identify with.
As I pointed out in class, Treadwell no doubt raised awareness of the bears in Alaska. Through his public engagements and appearances, he was certainly an integral part in fund raising activities for the Grizzly People, though to what extent I am not aware without further resarch. With a public image so notorious and extravagent, I am sure the Grizzly People welcomed many contributions from supportes throughout the United States, Cananda and the world, no doubt. However, I am sure he offended just as many people, if not more, through his actions in Alaska. As I said earlier, I do not agree with the way in which Treadwell went about his conservation efforts as it pertained to the way he was filming his documentary and his interactions with wildlife, including the coyotes which frequented his campsite. Desensitizing wildlife in this way makes them much less wary of humans and can only lead to eventual trouble, in many circumstances, once the natural distrust has left a wild animal.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
MLA Style Citations Link
I was required to purchase the book but there are resources availabe on the Internet for MLA Style Citations. By the way, I'm not going to site my sources. [Doh!, I kill myself, sometimes...]
MLA Citation Style
http://www.liu.edu/CWIS/CWP/library/workshop/citmla.htm
Write Source: MLA Style
http://thewritesource.com/mla.htm
MLA Citation Style
http://www.liu.edu/CWIS/CWP/library/workshop/citmla.htm
Write Source: MLA Style
http://thewritesource.com/mla.htm
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Thoughts on Tim Treadwell - Grizzly Man
I appreciated Tim's work and his film and I'll certainly rent the movie for the conclusion. I have worked with the Wolf Education & Research Center for the past several years and sympathise with his desire to educate the public about the brown bear and ecology in general.However, I believe Tim went too far with his work and he paid the ultimate price for his lack of discretion. He knew the posed based on his approach to his work. Will we be somehow compelled to feel sympathy for Tim or his cause or will we view his work as more comediac than anything else? I found myself chuckling more at his antics during the film rather than having his video and images making me stop to think about brown bears in their natural habitat.
To a great extent, I agree that Tim's interaction with the bears were highly inappropriate at times and Tim may have caused more damage to the bears than good. When I hear people talking about Tim I hear words like 'crazy' or 'stupid' and not endearing words like 'pioneering researcher'. There are other ways to educate the public without living with bears as Tim did. Documentary photography, in my opinion, is most effective when you allow the subject to act natural - National Geographic and Discovery are prime examples of wildlife documentary style to be emulated. Tim certainly crossed this line and based on what I saw, the bears, on more than one occasion, communicated their discomfort to him. He appears to have lost touch with reality near the middle of the film. He really appears to have lost touch with society. His walking rant about why women didn't appreciate him was a prime example that perhaps he should have stepped back and taken inventory on his approach and perhaps, his life in general. Simply put, Tim appears to have gone mad in the wilderness.
It is unfortunate that Tim lost his life attempting to be a do-gooder but the path he chose left little margin for error. He paid the ultimate price and he can't do any more good for the cause due to his tragic end. What is most tragic about this story is the loss of Amie, who had a intelligent and responsible fear of bears.
What a shame...
Here is a link to the incident report on Timothy Treadwell and Amie Huguenard
http://www.yellowstone-bearman.com/Tim_Treadwell.html
Monday, February 12, 2007
Who is this guy?
I am not really smart enough to grasp what Snyder suggests without asking some pointed questions in response to his writing but he seems to be suggesting that the Catholic (and perhaps the Mormon) church is encouraging us to have babies in order to increase the prosperity of the human race. Did he say that?
If he is suggesting that we need to somehow limit how many children a woman has, beyond education in less fortunate (or developing) countries, I think Snyder is a bit irresponsible and I'm certainly glad I didn't suggest it. This is definitely a way to make an awful lot of enemies in an awful hurry.
We have a few choices to make as far as how much our planet can sustain while we are all healthy. Humanity is growing at a rapid pace, there is no doubt. I see an awful lot of compassion, however, as it pertains to those who are less fortunate.
For those countries who cannot sustain their own population through traditional means, there always seems to be help. Adoption for foreign children is at an all-time high and I believe it is, unfortunately, a booming industry. We seem to take care of our own kind.
I do advocate educating those who might not have been taught about birth control and making those 'tools' available to those who do not have technology, such as birth control, available to whomever would like this assistance.
On the other hand, to question the Catholic (and the Mormon?) faith? Wow! This guy, when he wrote this, had a larger set of kahoonas than I do.
We need people, however, who are not afraid of expressing themselves. And at times, to express a shocker of an opinion, can hold value. I believe it stimulates curiosity and eventually, perhaps, it may institute change.
After my second child, I realized I wasn't exactly the best model for parenting and made a decision. At the time, I was not nearly as educated as I am not- but I still feel I made a decision based on some careful observations about my past and future.
It all boils down to either my understanding of myself or through knowledge of the implications of the future of my children and myself. Education is certainly the key but I'll hold those thoughts to myself and continue to do what I can for those less fortunate - when I am able.
I know this a weak stance and sort of stands in the middle but wow! I may not be smart enough to understand what it is Snyder is suggesting.
If he is suggesting that we need to somehow limit how many children a woman has, beyond education in less fortunate (or developing) countries, I think Snyder is a bit irresponsible and I'm certainly glad I didn't suggest it. This is definitely a way to make an awful lot of enemies in an awful hurry.
We have a few choices to make as far as how much our planet can sustain while we are all healthy. Humanity is growing at a rapid pace, there is no doubt. I see an awful lot of compassion, however, as it pertains to those who are less fortunate.
For those countries who cannot sustain their own population through traditional means, there always seems to be help. Adoption for foreign children is at an all-time high and I believe it is, unfortunately, a booming industry. We seem to take care of our own kind.
I do advocate educating those who might not have been taught about birth control and making those 'tools' available to those who do not have technology, such as birth control, available to whomever would like this assistance.
On the other hand, to question the Catholic (and the Mormon?) faith? Wow! This guy, when he wrote this, had a larger set of kahoonas than I do.
We need people, however, who are not afraid of expressing themselves. And at times, to express a shocker of an opinion, can hold value. I believe it stimulates curiosity and eventually, perhaps, it may institute change.
After my second child, I realized I wasn't exactly the best model for parenting and made a decision. At the time, I was not nearly as educated as I am not- but I still feel I made a decision based on some careful observations about my past and future.
It all boils down to either my understanding of myself or through knowledge of the implications of the future of my children and myself. Education is certainly the key but I'll hold those thoughts to myself and continue to do what I can for those less fortunate - when I am able.
I know this a weak stance and sort of stands in the middle but wow! I may not be smart enough to understand what it is Snyder is suggesting.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Defining Ethics
Ethics is described on Wikipedia as:
“.. a general term for what is often described as the "science (study) of morality". In philosophy, ethical behavior is that which is "good" or "right." The Western tradition of ethics is sometimes called moral philosophy. This is one part of value theory (axiology) – the other part is aesthetics – one of the four major branches of philosophy, alongside metaphysics, epistemology, and logic.”
The American Heritage Dictionary defines ethics as:
“A set of principles of right conduct. or A theory or a system of moral values. 2. ethics. (used with a sing. verb). The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy. 3. ethics. (used with a sing. or pl. verb). The rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession.”
By either definition, I’ll take the word ethics to mean that set of values which, defined on a personal level, makes you feel guilty about something you know to be wrong, due to socialization or high moral standards.
Each of us are taught ethics while growing up, though admittedly, some of us have a different set of ethics, or values, than do others. Ethics can vary widely, due to ethnic background or religious beliefs, but humanity, as a whole, should expect to have a similar set of ethics, or values, that mankind have in common.
“.. a general term for what is often described as the "science (study) of morality". In philosophy, ethical behavior is that which is "good" or "right." The Western tradition of ethics is sometimes called moral philosophy. This is one part of value theory (axiology) – the other part is aesthetics – one of the four major branches of philosophy, alongside metaphysics, epistemology, and logic.”
The American Heritage Dictionary defines ethics as:
“A set of principles of right conduct. or A theory or a system of moral values. 2. ethics. (used with a sing. verb). The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy. 3. ethics. (used with a sing. or pl. verb). The rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession.”
By either definition, I’ll take the word ethics to mean that set of values which, defined on a personal level, makes you feel guilty about something you know to be wrong, due to socialization or high moral standards.
Each of us are taught ethics while growing up, though admittedly, some of us have a different set of ethics, or values, than do others. Ethics can vary widely, due to ethnic background or religious beliefs, but humanity, as a whole, should expect to have a similar set of ethics, or values, that mankind have in common.
Friday, February 9, 2007
Where does knowledge come from?
There are times I really hate to mention in conversation 'what I know' or what I think I know. Case in point. During our class discussion the other day, we were talking about our auto manufacturers an not being able to sell American cars in the Chinese market. Here is an example where I thought I knew something based on our discussion.
So I take my new found 'knowledge' and express a newly formed opinion. However, I find this knowledge needs to be researched a bit more. My co-worker, as he describes below, took little time to update me with a little more inforation.
His email follows:
Didn’t spend much time looking, but I couldn’t find a single instance where it is said that the US can’t sell cars in China due to any restrictions. Found lots of articles about the Chinese looking to enter the US market soon, but concerns about the quality are the main issue there. However, did find n MSNBC article (link below) talking about how GM sells more Buicks in China than they do in the US. Also, from USAToday, I found a table showing the top Chinese auto retailers, and GM is #1, Ford is also on the top 10.
Here is the MSNBC link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16268883/from/et/
Here is the table from USAToday:
Top 10 automakers in China, by number of vehicles made in 2006:
1. General Motors - 880,706
2. Volkswagen - 697,796
3. Hyundai - 397,207
4. Honda - 360,051
5. Chang'an - 345,786
6. Toyota - 306,632
7. Chery Auto - 287,700
8. China FAW - 287,590
9. Ford Motor - 255,642
10. Renault-Nissan - 238,639
Source: PwC Automotive Institute 2007 Q1 Data Release
Anyway, that is about all of interest I could find in brief search.
So I take my new found 'knowledge' and express a newly formed opinion. However, I find this knowledge needs to be researched a bit more. My co-worker, as he describes below, took little time to update me with a little more inforation.
His email follows:
Didn’t spend much time looking, but I couldn’t find a single instance where it is said that the US can’t sell cars in China due to any restrictions. Found lots of articles about the Chinese looking to enter the US market soon, but concerns about the quality are the main issue there. However, did find n MSNBC article (link below) talking about how GM sells more Buicks in China than they do in the US. Also, from USAToday, I found a table showing the top Chinese auto retailers, and GM is #1, Ford is also on the top 10.
Here is the MSNBC link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16268883/from/et/
Here is the table from USAToday:
Top 10 automakers in China, by number of vehicles made in 2006:
1. General Motors - 880,706
2. Volkswagen - 697,796
3. Hyundai - 397,207
4. Honda - 360,051
5. Chang'an - 345,786
6. Toyota - 306,632
7. Chery Auto - 287,700
8. China FAW - 287,590
9. Ford Motor - 255,642
10. Renault-Nissan - 238,639
Source: PwC Automotive Institute 2007 Q1 Data Release
Anyway, that is about all of interest I could find in brief search.
Would somebody tell me what the hell is going on?
I'm a little confused. I understand that [alleged] global warming could have affects which we don't really understand - we all agree on that, right? I find myself talking more and more about the subject of global warming at work with my co-workers, people I respect a great deal. This is great, right? Hey, at last we're all talking about it.
The debate centers around what is natural for Earth because, frankly, we are not really sure about Earth's 'natural course'. Are we having an impact on the temperature of Earth? Of course we are. However, statistics show that the Earth is warming at a rate of fractions of a degree over the last.. What? Hundred years?
Would somebody explain to me how the hell we are in a global 'warming' crisis but New York just got 8 feet of snow overnight? And have you looked at your electric bill this month for the Lewis-Clark Valley? Did anybody see the normal average daily temperature and last months average daily temperature? There is a 10 degree colder than normal difference! 10 degrees!
What the hell is going on and what am I supposed to believe? I'm shaky here. I want to do my part and will continue to do what my conscience tells me to do. However....
Read this weeks final page in Newsweek. "Nothing Americans can do will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030." (Will 72)
Are you kidding me? Would somebody tell me why I am putting on more clothes on, freezing my ass off, when the Chinese really don't seem to give a crap about global warming? I should crank up the thermostat and get naked, which is a hell of a lot more comfortable than putting this bulky sweater on.
Will, George F. Inconvenient Kyoto Truths. The Last Word. Newweek 12 Feb. 2007
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16960409/site/newsweek/>.
Calgon, take me away...
The debate centers around what is natural for Earth because, frankly, we are not really sure about Earth's 'natural course'. Are we having an impact on the temperature of Earth? Of course we are. However, statistics show that the Earth is warming at a rate of fractions of a degree over the last.. What? Hundred years?
Would somebody explain to me how the hell we are in a global 'warming' crisis but New York just got 8 feet of snow overnight? And have you looked at your electric bill this month for the Lewis-Clark Valley? Did anybody see the normal average daily temperature and last months average daily temperature? There is a 10 degree colder than normal difference! 10 degrees!
What the hell is going on and what am I supposed to believe? I'm shaky here. I want to do my part and will continue to do what my conscience tells me to do. However....
Read this weeks final page in Newsweek. "Nothing Americans can do will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030." (Will 72)
Are you kidding me? Would somebody tell me why I am putting on more clothes on, freezing my ass off, when the Chinese really don't seem to give a crap about global warming? I should crank up the thermostat and get naked, which is a hell of a lot more comfortable than putting this bulky sweater on.
Works Cited
Will, George F. Inconvenient Kyoto Truths. The Last Word. Newweek 12 Feb. 2007
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16960409/site/newsweek/>.
Calgon, take me away...
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Now THAT's what I'm talking about...
I am convinced I am going to like this class. Hopefully, scores are based more on spirited debate and participation, rather than the actual amount of homework I submit.
I admit, I am on auto pilot. I want out of school more than I'd like to share - face to face, that is. I took a different path through college, coming back to school after 15+ years of being in the work force. Things were going great then - WHAM! I lost my job. Such is life.
I am massively in debt now and I a scared. This big bill I'm going to exit school which is daunting and somewhat intimidating. My college repayment plan, added to my child support obligations - I fear I won't be able to get a job to support all this.
Ok, back to today. It was a great conversation. Personally, I wish we could just talk our way through this class. I have quite a bit of time to think and have no known limit of my opinions and observations, which I rarely hesitate to share to those who will listen. I guess my biggest problem is keeping my mouth shut sometimes. Do you disagree with what I say or think? All the better. I find it a great way to learn and grow. I hope, however, you don't take anything I say personally or get your feelings hurt. In advance, I apologize if you find this to be the case.
I respect you all and hope we will grow through our brief expoure to one another.
Ta-ta for now.
I admit, I am on auto pilot. I want out of school more than I'd like to share - face to face, that is. I took a different path through college, coming back to school after 15+ years of being in the work force. Things were going great then - WHAM! I lost my job. Such is life.
I am massively in debt now and I a scared. This big bill I'm going to exit school which is daunting and somewhat intimidating. My college repayment plan, added to my child support obligations - I fear I won't be able to get a job to support all this.
Ok, back to today. It was a great conversation. Personally, I wish we could just talk our way through this class. I have quite a bit of time to think and have no known limit of my opinions and observations, which I rarely hesitate to share to those who will listen. I guess my biggest problem is keeping my mouth shut sometimes. Do you disagree with what I say or think? All the better. I find it a great way to learn and grow. I hope, however, you don't take anything I say personally or get your feelings hurt. In advance, I apologize if you find this to be the case.
I respect you all and hope we will grow through our brief expoure to one another.
Ta-ta for now.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Global Warming: Fact or Fiction? Who cares?
In the early to mid-80’s, as I recall, we were introduced to global warming. Lately, these words and what they mean to the future of our planet have experienced resurgence in the media and are taking center stage with many scientists and politicians. There are things I know about global warming, there are things I think I know about global warming, then there are things I wish I knew less about or felt less strongly about. It appears that temperatures on our planet are going up – data suggests it’s been happening for the past 100 years at an accelerated pace. Some of this climatic change could be part of a natural cycle but there is also strong evidence to suggest humans have contributed to this rapid acceleration. Do we care, do we care enough to do anything about it and if we do something today, will it be too late to save mankind?
These are tough questions and questions which may not result in easy or comfortable answers. President Bush suggested policy change in his 2007 State of the Union address, stating we need to become less dependent on foreign oil. I agree with this, Mr. President, however, politicians have been beating their chest for decades saying we need to become less dependent on foreign oil – this statement is getting a little old with little progress toward that goal. I do allow a president a little latitude during a state of the union address. He is, after all, a politician and most are trying to ensure their future service in government. This president, however, has little at stake, other than trying to change his administrations legacy, which will not be viewed favorably in most cases. I am tired of sound bites like ‘we are protecting our vital interests in the middle east’. I want them to be frank and say ‘we need the middle east’s oil’, or ‘we need to ensure our vital supply of oil’. During the state of the union last week, President Bush said he wanted to double the current capacity of our strategic oil reserves so that we are less dependent on foreign imports of oil. Moments before, he was suggesting we reduce gasoline consumption by 20 percent over the next 10 years by encouraging better economic fuel standards. While I like to hear these things from those setting our nation’s foreign policy, I have learned that campaign promises or suggestions during the state of the union address are mostly ‘feel good, hoorah’ words with very little substance once introduced in the legislative branches of our government. Empty promises and rhetoric, I believe is how these words are described on nightly newscasts.
As citizens, it boils down to this – what are we willing to do? Will we car pool more often, take public transportation, buy hybrid vehicles and put those gas guzzling SUV’s out to pasture? Economic data suggests we are not quite at that point. I, for one, would be proud to drive one of those nice, new and shiny hybrid vehicles. With limited means, however, that’s not likely to happen for several more years. Public transportation is abysmal in most places I have visited – unclean with little by way of feelings of security. I acknowledge the fact that I did make it to my final preferred destination and, disregarding the discomfort, it was an adventure. There is not an effective system for mass transportation in towns like Lewiston, Idaho, which cannot support a viable bus route for the masses – we all have such peculiar needs and disparate schedules, it would be a waste of valuable and limited funding resources. I hesitate to mention how many times people would rather turn up the thermostat than put on a sweater when they are cold and I am alarmed at the lack of good sense of the youth of my community as I watch them walking to school in January with little more than a t-shirt on. On more than one occasion I have been reminded at how much like a jerk I sound like when I suggest kids turn out a light when leaving a room when involved with those I call my ‘better half’. Who is being ridiculous here?
Yes, the data is somewhat alarming and yes, I’d like to do my part. However, I admit, only if I am not inconvenienced by doing so. I do not make arrangements with anybody from work to see if I can car pool with them. At the same time, I am not sure they would loan me their vehicle when I need to go to class. I will, however, turn down my thermostat (base-board heaters, in my present situation) and turn off lights when they are not in use, and I do this for several reasons. One is obviously to reduce my electricity costs and the other, somewhere in the back of my mind, is to help stop, in some insignificant way, my dependence on foreign oil.
I am sure I am not the only one to feel this way but I feel very insignificant when exercise my right to vote as a free citizen of this great nation? Then I have to watch as the Supreme Court decides he or she who is most popular is not the correct person for the job and I ask myself – Ok, what’s the point?
These are tough questions and questions which may not result in easy or comfortable answers. President Bush suggested policy change in his 2007 State of the Union address, stating we need to become less dependent on foreign oil. I agree with this, Mr. President, however, politicians have been beating their chest for decades saying we need to become less dependent on foreign oil – this statement is getting a little old with little progress toward that goal. I do allow a president a little latitude during a state of the union address. He is, after all, a politician and most are trying to ensure their future service in government. This president, however, has little at stake, other than trying to change his administrations legacy, which will not be viewed favorably in most cases. I am tired of sound bites like ‘we are protecting our vital interests in the middle east’. I want them to be frank and say ‘we need the middle east’s oil’, or ‘we need to ensure our vital supply of oil’. During the state of the union last week, President Bush said he wanted to double the current capacity of our strategic oil reserves so that we are less dependent on foreign imports of oil. Moments before, he was suggesting we reduce gasoline consumption by 20 percent over the next 10 years by encouraging better economic fuel standards. While I like to hear these things from those setting our nation’s foreign policy, I have learned that campaign promises or suggestions during the state of the union address are mostly ‘feel good, hoorah’ words with very little substance once introduced in the legislative branches of our government. Empty promises and rhetoric, I believe is how these words are described on nightly newscasts.
As citizens, it boils down to this – what are we willing to do? Will we car pool more often, take public transportation, buy hybrid vehicles and put those gas guzzling SUV’s out to pasture? Economic data suggests we are not quite at that point. I, for one, would be proud to drive one of those nice, new and shiny hybrid vehicles. With limited means, however, that’s not likely to happen for several more years. Public transportation is abysmal in most places I have visited – unclean with little by way of feelings of security. I acknowledge the fact that I did make it to my final preferred destination and, disregarding the discomfort, it was an adventure. There is not an effective system for mass transportation in towns like Lewiston, Idaho, which cannot support a viable bus route for the masses – we all have such peculiar needs and disparate schedules, it would be a waste of valuable and limited funding resources. I hesitate to mention how many times people would rather turn up the thermostat than put on a sweater when they are cold and I am alarmed at the lack of good sense of the youth of my community as I watch them walking to school in January with little more than a t-shirt on. On more than one occasion I have been reminded at how much like a jerk I sound like when I suggest kids turn out a light when leaving a room when involved with those I call my ‘better half’. Who is being ridiculous here?
Yes, the data is somewhat alarming and yes, I’d like to do my part. However, I admit, only if I am not inconvenienced by doing so. I do not make arrangements with anybody from work to see if I can car pool with them. At the same time, I am not sure they would loan me their vehicle when I need to go to class. I will, however, turn down my thermostat (base-board heaters, in my present situation) and turn off lights when they are not in use, and I do this for several reasons. One is obviously to reduce my electricity costs and the other, somewhere in the back of my mind, is to help stop, in some insignificant way, my dependence on foreign oil.
I am sure I am not the only one to feel this way but I feel very insignificant when exercise my right to vote as a free citizen of this great nation? Then I have to watch as the Supreme Court decides he or she who is most popular is not the correct person for the job and I ask myself – Ok, what’s the point?
Why is English so stuffy?
I'm sitting here in English 102 taking notes. I'm noticing a disturbing trend - English is SO STUFFY! Rules, MLA, APA, stupid abbreviations of the months (Jan., Feb., Mar. - but spell out May, June & July?? [did I get that right? Let me look at my 800 page reference guide!!])
Argh! There is a reason I didn't take English (don't appreviate the word English) 102 until the bitter end. However, I admit it had more to do with not wanting to spend this much time in the library.
I keep waffeling on my research topic. There appear to be trends with the changing dynamics of the American family and with our system of values. However, I also have many questions regarding the way men and women interact with each other and why we can't rely on each other to be honest anymore. So many questions, so little free time.
In both cases, I am a numbers cruncher, a data point collector, and can deduce my own conclusions based on compiled numbers. Finding the data in the format I would like to see it in, however, will be the biggest challenge I will face this semster. Give it to me in ASCII comma separated values and let me run queries against the data in SQL. Heck, I'll even keep the data stored neatly in a database engine!!
So, the challenge starts. Luckily, some of my papers which are due will compliment my Ethics & Ecology class, so writing one paper may prove the ability to kill two birds. WAHOO!
Off I go! I have a half hour left of class - perhaps I should pay attention now and take more notes.
Argh! There is a reason I didn't take English (don't appreviate the word English) 102 until the bitter end. However, I admit it had more to do with not wanting to spend this much time in the library.
I keep waffeling on my research topic. There appear to be trends with the changing dynamics of the American family and with our system of values. However, I also have many questions regarding the way men and women interact with each other and why we can't rely on each other to be honest anymore. So many questions, so little free time.
In both cases, I am a numbers cruncher, a data point collector, and can deduce my own conclusions based on compiled numbers. Finding the data in the format I would like to see it in, however, will be the biggest challenge I will face this semster. Give it to me in ASCII comma separated values and let me run queries against the data in SQL. Heck, I'll even keep the data stored neatly in a database engine!!
So, the challenge starts. Luckily, some of my papers which are due will compliment my Ethics & Ecology class, so writing one paper may prove the ability to kill two birds. WAHOO!
Off I go! I have a half hour left of class - perhaps I should pay attention now and take more notes.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Ok, I'm here. Now what?
This blog is a requirement for Humanities: Ethics & Ecology. Our instructor, Dr. Hepworth (http://jimhepworth.com), says he wants us to speak up so I'm speaking.
Wish me luck. Isn't it dangerous to have a strong opinion about anything when you own a business and you're trying ot bring in dollars from your community?
In light of the previous statement, I probably won't say many earth shattering things here. Sorry but that's the way it has to be.
Wish me luck. Isn't it dangerous to have a strong opinion about anything when you own a business and you're trying ot bring in dollars from your community?
In light of the previous statement, I probably won't say many earth shattering things here. Sorry but that's the way it has to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
