Total Pageviews

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Response to Lab Grown Meat Study

This article, "Meat from Scratch" by Stephen Ornes, explains how scientists are working on the production of meat made in a lab rather than meat made by killing animals. This idea of lab grown meat will be very beneficial to the environment in the future.
One way this will be beneficial to the future is it will save our decreasing land and diminishing trees. In the article it states, "The population of the planet is increasing, which boosts the demand for meat. The amount of land available for raising livestock probably wont be able to meet the increasing demand for much longer." This shows that by using this lab engineered meat we can keep the trees we need to give us carbon dioxide and save precious land that we could be using for other things.
Another way that lab grown meat can be beneficial to the environment is it can help stop the polluting of our soil with pesticides, and the production of greenhouse gases. Stephen Ornes writes in the article that, "Moreover, raising animals for food can take a toll on the environment. The practice increases pollution and boosts levels of greenhouse gases, which increase global warming." This is an example of the fact that that killing animals to make our meat hurts our earth and contributes to all the other factors of global warming as well. If we use lab grown meat perhaps the issue of global warming could decrease and help to save our ozone. 
The fact that we must kill animals to get our meat right now is harming the environment around us. Using non grown lab meat is causing precious land around us to disappear and trees that provide us with carbon dioxide to vanish. Non lab grown meat is also adding to the pollution of our soil and production of greenhouse gases. With lab grown meat though, we can help to prevent all these things from happening and save the environment. Possibly the production of engineered meat will cause other problems due to chemicals that they are using, but that's a question for future studies.

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Plagiarizing Q's

What the student that wrote this response did wrong was they incorporated another writer’s work without listing the source/ giving credit to the original author. That is called plagiarizing which is not only illegal but is unfair to those who worked hard to write something and won’t be able to be recognized for it. What the student could have done to include the source correctly was to use a quotation mark to separate his writing from the other authors writing and they said where this quote came from so the writer got credit. If the student didn’t want to do that, they could have tried to paraphrase the chunk of writing, which basically means to put them into their own words but keep the idea and concept.
An example of a way the student could have used the original source correctly by paraphrasing is:
"There is a night sky filled with swirling clouds, stars ablaze with their own luminescence, and a bright crescent moon."- www.vangoghgallery.com, "A Brief Understanding of the Starry Night Paintings." (No author).
The night described above is from the painting by Vincent Van Gogh "Starry Night", this sky is filled with a lot of detail and the scene is familiar to many people and therefore that many people are content with; because Most of us can look up- and all see a starry night.
Three ways to avoid plagiarizing is:
One, You can use a semi colon or a comma and quotation marks to separate your writing from another writers that you are using in your work. Don’t forget to cite the source the quote comes from.
Two, you can paraphrase the chunk of another authors writing you would like to use by putting it into your own words. It will work just the same, as long as you keep the original idea of the quote.
And three, you could summarize the writing.

Thursday, April 12, 2012

My response to Joyce and Jamila's Blog Posts

I read over Joyce's piece about the huger games, "Gale vs. Peeta" and thought that it was a very well structured and interesting thought provoking piece. What I liked most about the reading response was how she asked questions to her readers. This I thought was unique and something to follow after because it got the reader thinking about the writing in more depth and got them more focused because they could interact with her words. What I also liked about her writing was she doesn't write it in boring plain paragraphs, nor does she only share her opinions on certain parts of the book. What Joyce does is she in cooperates a sense of her voice and her emotions into her words so that the reader does not feel like it is reading a piece but maybe listening to her voice tell them about it. Another blog post that I read over and enjoyed was Jamila's response to Tupac’s song. What I liked a lot about this response was how she really got inside his mind ad explored his thoughts on this song even further, she took his original ideas to a new level. Another thing that I really enjoyed was how she took what she picked up from the song and used to create ideas about life ad connect it to the world.
I learned a lot from just reading their two responses and want to try some of the things that made their posts so good in mine. One thing that I want to try in my blog posts is trying to engage my readers more in my writing, like asking questions and sharing my feelings and emotions so that they are more interested in what I have to say. Another thing that I would like to try is to elaborate on my ideas further- I don’t want to end at just the end of the thought; I want to take it further to new levels. I’m very excited to use these new techniques, hope it helps my writing.