p.100 Thinking about the Text

1.If it had been necessary to convince me of her view point Katherine Spriggs would have done so. As it happens I already agree with the topic, that said I appreciate the points she makes and the evidence that she uses to back up her points. The examples of how polyculture farms can work, such as the pigs plowing blueberries, are especially useful; especially when one considers that monoculture farms are wasting resources trying to make up for the fact that they don't do those things. Spriggs' explanation of how adversely the current system effects the environment solidly establishes the importance of her topic.

2.She considers the argument that small farms are not as efficient as large farms and refutes it by pointing out that it really depends on the efficiency you are looking for; small farms are more efficient when it comes to “total output of all crops per acre” as opposed to “output of one crop per acre.” She addresses the possibility of growing more food in the U.S. having a greater negative impact on the environment then our current system as the U.S. uses more advanced technology then the 3^rd world nations we import food from, by offering the statistics that the American diet is only 13% imported.

3.The fact that scientists predict that by 2030 the glaciers of Glacier National Park will be purely history is especially convincing to me, because of the following points: it is very appropriate background info, it is a crystal clear indication of why it matters, it is both good reasoning and evidence, it may appeal to whatever values a vaguely environmentally conscious person has left.

4.The photographs that Spriggs' includes give us a look into the portions of the world she is talking about. The photo of gourds in the farmers market show shopping locally in a pleasant light, encouraging people to visit there and shop locally. The opposing photos of a small polyculture farm and a large monoculture farm show us the stark reality of their differences, the former has a human for scale and neat rows of identifiable plants laid out neatly in the dirt, whereas the latter is on a such a scale that a human would be a speck and the plants are little more than a uniform green carpet of strict mechanized gloom. The photo of trucks trucking on down the road amid the forest green brings home the environmental impact of transporting food that is imported from somewhere else.

Ælfhild Wiklund's Annotation

for

Characteristic

features of

position papers

Analysis of “What is Threatening Polarbears article?”

The website endangeredpolarbear.com has an article entitled “What is Threatening Polar Bears?.” The article explains how humans are damaging our planet in such a manner as to destroy the polar bears' habitat. The article uses facts, such as the nature of the Greenhouse Effect, to support its viewpoint.

Copy of text from:

http://www.endangeredpolarbear.com/polar-bear-threats.html

What is Threatening Polar Bears?

 Appropriate  Polar bears live in a very specific habitat.  They need the cold, snow and ice of  the polar regions.  That is why   background    they are called "polar bears" and not "summer  bears."  Polar bears have very few natural threats in the polar   information.  region.  Polar  bears are on the top of the food chain and there are no other animals in the  north that will                              threaten the polar bears.  So why are the polar bears now on the  threatened/endangered species  list?

                 Polar bears are not threatened because of other animals or because they are  being hunted too much.                 Appeal to  Polar bears are threatened as a direct effect on how we as humans treat the earth and the environment.            readers values. People have begun to take the Earth for granted.  They have treated it as thought it is indestructible.  When if                       fact, the earth is destructible, and we are destroying it.   

                           Polar bears live in the arctic, and like many other places on earth, the  has had scientists who are learning                        about what is happening to  that specific region of the earth.  The scientists have been doing deep core .                           This is where they drill a hole down into the ice and pull out a core of  ice.   In this core of ice the scientists can                       get very specific information about the weather, the atmosphere, and the temperature for a specific                                         time period.  These core tests can determine facts from 420,000 years.
                         The deep core tests have revealed facts about the CO2 (carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere.  There is a               Evidence. natural up and down range that the levels have, these levels have never gone over 300 parts per million, that                         is until recent years.  Now what does this mean?  It means that some of the carbon dioxide that used                                         to leave the Earth's atmosphere is now remaining inside the atmosphere.  The carbon  dioxide that is                               remaining on earth, also known as greenhouse gases, is raising  the earth's temperature, causing the                                 "Greenhouse Effect."

                   Now you may wonder what all of this has to do with the polar bears.  The polar bears live in a very                                  sensitive environment.   The  arctic region is made of snow and ice.  Snow and ice is what the polar bears                           depend on for their survival.  The "Greenhouse Effect" warms the earth, and therefore, melts the precious snow                               and ice that the polar bears need for survival.
                     So it is easy to deduce from this, that we, humans, are the cause of the polar bears being threatened.  We are An explicit         slowly killing the planet and most of us are oblivious to it.  Global warming can be slowed down, the polar    opinion is stated  bears do have  a chance.

Characteristic Features not found:

A response to what others have said or done.

A clear indication of why the topic matters.

Attention to more than one point of view.

I believe that by including a response to what others have said or done and by paying attention to more than one point of view they could have composed a worthy counter-argument which would have addressed concerns that would be converts to their position might have. Such as, there is nothing we can do, or why should we care about a nasty ferocious bear? Not that I think that way but I know that some people do.

Brain storm for position paper

Anthropogenic climate disorder.

Current climate change is anthropogenic and we are responsible for fixing it.

Audience, humans.

Purpose, convince humans that they are responsible for reducing pollution.

They should care because we all are stuck with this planet.  If we don't act it will only get worse faster.  They believe there is nothing they can do.

Pygmy kayaks get you closer to the water in style.

 Running Start is preferable to AP classes.

School holidays should be evenly divided throughout the year.

Dragons are the most advanced magical creature.

Paranormal fantasy is inferior to fairytales or sword and sorcery.

Humans are incredibly destructive creatures.

People should dress as they please, fashion is ridiculous.

In Class Video Analyses

In Class Video Analyses

We all chose three different videos.

Someone dies in every video.

Pathos:

All use emotional appeals of people who were close with the victim(s) like their parents.

Sad music which hits your emotions

They all had close ups.

Logos:

They all involved driving accidents and the driver doing something they shouldn’t be doing.

The statistics of their age, being in their late teens, appeals to logic.

In one of the videos there was a doctor speaking.

Ethos:

They all built up the victim’s character and the credibility of the speakers.

To identify the relationship the speakers had with the victims they had labels.

Summary and Analysis of “Distracted Driving” Video

Ælfhild Wiklund

    The “Distracted Driving” video, by the Childrens' Hospital London Health Sciences Center, trauma program, is a youtube video about the effects of the momentary distraction of Joshua Lewis Field on himself and his associates. An illfated grab for his cell phone cost him his life. He was a comic person and his loss was a great blow to all who knew him. In the video his associates seek to prevent others from repeating his mistake.

    The video uses a variety of emotional appeals: melancholy background music, the sorrow drenched voices of those who knew him, first hand anecdotes, tears. The anecdotes appealed to ethos by building our image of the victim (who also happened to be the perpetrator) and the labels on each speaker established their credibility: mother, friend, doctor. The harsh reality of his death, the numbers 1991-2009, all appeal to logic, we don't want that to be us after all. Some of the anecdotes appealed to our emotions in a more abstract manner, such as impromptu parties at work, which made clear just how much people would miss him. Others could almost be seen as a logical appeal, fragments of home videos and the fact that he was going into the video industry when he got older, but didn't make it; we can recognize that if we made his mistake our plans could be cut short, linking very directly to the logical appeal of, I don't want to die.

In Class Lab 11/10

Peace Sign Buttons

                The first button suggests just peace symbol and fancy writing. The second basically says that peace is love not war, also that there is no love in war. The first button says “Peace”. The second button says “Make Love Not War”. They both have a universal peace sign. People wore these buttons in protest to the wars going on in the 60’s. The button on the left is more relaxed with its wavy font, the one on the right is saying you should do this. It is more bold and specified, also, it is stricter and sharp, and clear cut lines.

Symbols of Patriotism--- USA, Great Britain, and France

                They are suggesting that patriotism comes in different forms. America has a Bald Eagle with an American Flag. Great Britain has a Bulldog and the national flag. Lastly, France has a motto, Liberte (freedom), Egalite (equality), Fraternite (fraternity/brotherhood).  The first image on the left is sharp, with the lines of the flag to the outline of the bird with the black background, it shows how severe and strong the USA is. The eagle represents freedom because birds can go anywhere, they are limitless. Great Britain’s flag in this picture looks like it expands forever. The dog standing atop of it has a proud and big stance. France, the picture to the right might be a little contradictory because there is a security camera in the picture, when the quote contains the word “freedom”.   

THESIS: Every nation has something to represent it that stands for the nation's pride. These three images convey this in the manner explained below.

The bald eagle represents to American citizens strength and bravery. In the image the eagle is integrated with the flag signifying that it has become part of the nation. The bulldog looks like it is guarding the flag which is a symbol of the nation, discouraging enemies from challenging them. France's motto is showing its strength by being written in stone.

In Class Lab 11/10 Tim Wise

What ARGUMENTS does the author make? He has a stance as whether or not we should use the N-word as white people. His position is that white people should not use that word, it is none or our business. Yes by answering these questions we will be analyzing.

How persuasive do you find the argument? It is very persuasive, Tim Wise gives a lot of examples and he is very informed with his argument. He also wrote a book and during the video he would quote some lines from it. None of Tim’s assumptions are questionable, he seems credible. His white friend didn’t understand why he couldn’t use that word even though his friends (black or white) used that word. It like his analogy with your mom, you can say whatever you want about your own mom but no one else dares or you will be very upset. “His Jewish grandfather can make jokes about Jews, but the local Christian church cannot”.

What is the authors STANCE? Tim is very biased. Any argument is biased in its own way. Since Tim is from the south, he knows the community and how they can use the N-word or certain phrases that have a negative effect on certain communities. Tim Wise does consider the opposing views, he talks about how some white people think they are helping the black community by saying it. Tim acknowledged other viewpoints but he only cited his own.

Does the publisher bring a certain stance to the work? The book publisher(s) had to have agreed with Tim and his stance in some way.

Do you recognize ideas you’ve run across in other sources? We know that as white people we don’t have the right to say the N-word.

Does this source support or challenge your own position?  We agree with his

What can you tell about the intended AUDIENCE and PURPOSE?  The audience is mainly white people. The purpose is to convince white people that they have no right to use that word. We are members of the audience addressed. The main purpose is to argue a certain point.