Datasets:

DysfunctionalHuman

/

essay-scoring

like 0

I think that the face is just a natural marking,and there is no proof that it was created by aliens.In the unmasking of the face of mars it looks nothing like a face would you still think it was created my aliens?Scientists didn't even think it was face.Even though some might think it was created by aliens there are a lot of things on this earth,that are weird looking but we don't know how they came about.I don't think aliens would do anything that perfect looking.On the JPL website it revealed a natural landfrom,there was no alien monument after.Even though some people weren't satisfied with the picture,they probably were still thinking it was created by aliens.The face is located at 41 degrees north martin latitude,where it was winter in april '98 a cloudy time of year on the red planet.The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Skeptics think alien markings were hidden by haze,but it is cloudy around that time.I say I have proven my point ,and i dont think that it was created by aliens. There are many artifacts on earth some may be created by aliens some cloudn't.The face on this palnt is a natural artifact.

The passage "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" is a really intresting passage. In the text states, that "VAUBAN, Germany-Residents of this upscale community are suburban pioneers, going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: they have given up their cars". This shows, that if they have to go somewhere they go walking. Also the street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbiden in this experimental new district on the outskirts of Freiburg. However, In Vauban's streets are completely "car-free"-except the main thoroughfare, where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs, and few streets on one of the edge of the community. But car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park, and is for $40,000, along with a house. And as a result , 70% of Vauban's families do not onw cars, and 57% sold a car to move there. Because when she had a car she was always tense. Also cars causes lazyness to do stuff, and it doesn't keep you healthty. For example, when you walk you stregh your body and and all the parts of your body are moving. But when you use car you sit down and sometimes that can cause a back problem. Forthere more, all of our development since World War II has been centerd on the car, and that has to change. In Levittown and Scarsdale, New York suburbs with  spread-out homes and private garages, were the drea towns of the 1950s and still exert a strong appel. This means, that back then spread-out homes and private garages where the dream towns. In the United States, the Enviromental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities are staring to act, caustiously. Indeed, many experts escept public transporter serving suburbs to play much larger role in a new six year federal transpotation bills to be approved this year. Also in previous bills, 80% have by law gone to highways and only 20% to other transport. This means that having a car is a really waste of money but its also important to have a car.

Most people are with the fact that we vote for Electoral College but unfortuntley , im not. I am in favor to change to Election by popular vote for the President of the United States. voting for Electoral College dosent make sense and its completly unfair to the people voting and their is a certainty of outcome..The reason why i am against the Electoral College Vote Is cause we think were voting for the president , when were not and its confusing and it dosent make sense. For example , In the article " Does the Electoral College Work?" source 1 ,pharagrapgh 15 , it states that "Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense,"when the people vote , their voting for a slate of electors. So when we vote , its actually were voting for the electors who get to vote for the president , not the people and its really unfair .Each party selects a slatetrusted to vote for the partys nominee. In addition to my previous point , the second reason why i am against the Electoral College Vote is because its not for to the people who are voting for it .As it states in pharagraph 3 , because of the winner-take all system in each state, candidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning in. For example , "During the 2000 campaign , seventeen states didnt see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didnt get to see a single campaign ad." A dispute over the outcome of Electoral College Vote is possible- it happened in 2000- but its less likely than a dispute over the popular vote. in pharagrapgh 18, it states that the reason is that the winning candidates share of the Electoral Collge is invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote. To conclude , I am against the Electoral College vote because its unfair, confusing and makes no sense ." Its hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the Electoral College!  

This software is valuable, for the simple fact of i"ve seen alot of photos. knowing whats this painting is feelings can help you understand. In the "Mona Lisa" she has diferent emotions going on. Just looking at the painting you woudlnt think that there is any type of emotion, but thats when the machine kicks in. Mona llisa lacks a big smile, but she 83% happy. If thats the case more paintings need to go thru this machine. Also Mona lisa was 9% disgusted, 6% fearful, and 2% angry. Just from looking at the painting what would you think? I dont even know what I thought her expressions were. It's hard to tell but this machine helped out alot. So, yes the software is vaulable, not every day you hear about a machine that calculates emotion. If we had this machines in school you'd know whats wrong with your girlfreind or friend. Reading about this makes me question alot of pictures now. Now i think and ask how many other paintings have a meaning to it.

The authors claim is that Venus is a worthy pursuit depite the danger. He thinks that we should be able to go and come back. For example, in the artical "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it says "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." Next it said "This is saying that they might not be able to make thing great and work out the way they wanted it to be but they still made the things happen and take the time they needed. They also think it would be a good thing to do because they have seen things go down and not work like they wanted it to. They also said "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limmited by danger and douts but should be expanded to meet the vary edges of imagination and innovation. "They want the things to go as planed and they want us to see things we have never seen and to go to places we have yet not discover and known about.The author also wants us to know what they are working on and what they think about what will happpen later on in life and see that we will be able to do things that others have not done in the past. NASA also wants people to travle and get to see the things we have not seen before. The author wants us to know what is going on in our daily life. The author also wants us to see what we have to do later in life and see that we can make things work and we should not be ashamed about it. NASA wants to be able to see if we can live in Venus and countine life where there is no life. It can be hard to make all the things we will need but at the end we have a place to live. The author also said the NASA has been thinking about it for a sometime now.

In the article provided called "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author describes to us how there is new technology being developed that can identify human emotions. This technolofy called the Facial Action Coding System, like us will be able to make the same "calculation' we do to tell if our friends are happy, sad mad, etc. Now this computer software stores anatomical informationn as if it were a electronic code. Many have thought that since this technonology enables computers to read human emotions; why not put it in a classroom setting where it can teach a whole group instuction and modify the lesson once theres a sign of confussion in a child's facial expression. I personally beleive that this software should be included in clasrooms for various reasons. For starters the Facial Action Coding System is very valuable for the classroom setting because like I stated before if there is even a slight sign of confusion the new technology will be able to pick it up and improve to find a way for the student to coprehend the material. While the system uses video imagery the emotion-recognition software tracks all these facial movements in a real time face or in any image. Just imagine a computer being able to tell when you smile at a lesson plan because it's easy to coperhend; futhermore, the system will tr to find similar lessons plans like the one you were sown for next time.Now if you dislike it and frown the computer will take notice and the lesson plan will be diffrent next time. Another reason we should have the Facial Action Coding System in classrooms is because many children in this generation are either to shy to ask questions to the instuctors or just scared that they will e made fun of. SInce the student is to scared or just simply to shy to ask a question he or she will not be able to understand the topic; however, with the system in the computer the student wouldnt even need to raise their hand in doubt because the technology already detected his or her confussion and is finding a solution as soon as possible. Last but not least most human communication is nonverbal, dont you agree? I think its time for computers to understand that to. Since the computer can detect emotions without hearing anything spoken it will be able to detect if the students are happy with the lesson plan, confused with it, or just not like it. All with one look at the students faces. This hencing adapting and improving more quickly so students can learn the material and suceed. So can you imagine not having those long boring talks teachers give or actually understanding what they are trying to get you to comperhend? All your classroom problem will be solved with the Facial Action Coding System which will help you learn much faster and efficently; therefor, setting you on the path to sucesses.

Thechnology advances as the years go by,and as the years go by they become more and more human. But just as a human has emotions and can read it, can the technology be able to read it? In and article called " Making Mona Lisa Smille" a scientist named Dr. Huang developes a technology that is able to read human emotions, and that can simplify the way students learn. This technology should be used in the classrooms to read students emotions because it will be easier for them, and it will help the students to learn better. This technology should be put in the classrooms because it will help them to learn better. The article tells us that,when the technology is installed in the computer and the students use it, it will identify by their emotional expressions if they understand what they're learning or not. After that it will modify the lesson so that the students can comprehend what they're learning. By doing that it will help more students to understand their work and it will be a little easier for them to get a good grade. It will also help them when they are doing a Project and don't understand what the Web is talking about. Another reason why the technology should be in the classrooms is because it would make it easier for the students to understand whats going on in their class. for example when a student ahs a project and its doing the researching. It finds a Website but does not understand what is going on, so the computer will recognize that the student does not understand what is written on the page, and it will find another Website that corresponds to what the student is looking for but is a little easier to understand. The paragraph six in the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile " tells us something similiar, It says,"If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similiar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." What the paragraph says is that the technology notices when you like somthing or not, or when you understand or not. A technology like that can really help students make progress in their education. The technology should be in the classrooms so that it can help students make progress in their classes. The technology would help increase the students scores, and by doing maybe more students would go to college. The technology would help students advance in their classes and it would be easier for the teacher. It would make so many things easier and the easier, the better.

The Face on Mars "The Face on Mars" is a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head," as NASA stated in 1976. Many know that it is just a natural landform like on earth, but some believe that the Face was created by aliens. The Face is nothing more than a natural landform because we have landforms like it here on earth, photographic evidence reveals a natural landform, and there is no evidence that the Face was built by life outside of earth. The Face on Mars is nothing more than a natural landform, just like we have on earth. Jim Garvin, who is the chief scientist of NASA's Mars Exploration Program, knows that the Face is just another landform. "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," he said, "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." This is just one piece of evidence that the Face cannot be anything more than a natural landform--because it has many characteristics of a landform here on earth. A second reason that the Face on Mars is nothing more than a natural landform is because of the images taken in 2001 by Mars Global Surveyor (MGS). Twenty five years after its first photographs, clearer, higher resolution photos of Face came from MGS. From the 43 meters per pixel in the 1976 photograph versus the 1.56 meters per pixel in the 2001 photograph, there is clearly enough evidence that the Face on Mars is just a natural land formation similar to a mesa. The rises and dips in the landform just resemble the shape of eyes, nose, and mouth of a human face and nothing more, but after seen more clearly, cracks and crevaces in the land prove that the Face is just a natural landform. Those who believe that the Face on Mars was built by aliens have nothing to base their beliefs on other than the fact that the landform resembles a face. No evidence whatsoever suggests that the Face was built by supernatural life. On the other hand, photos--and common sense itself--prove that the landform is just another landform like we have on earth. The passage itself proves the authenticity of the landform. It says that "thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform. There was no alien monument at all," proving that the Face is only a landform. To conclude, no evidence suggests that the Face on Mars is anything more than a natural landform. The Face has characteristics of a landform on earth, and images of it from 2001 reveal only a landform. On top of that, those who believe that alien activity is responsible for the creation of the Face have little to no information to base their beliefs on. In the end, though, we know that the little landform called the Face of Mars is just one of our universe's great mysteries.

We use technology everyday. Technology helps us get through the day and our work a lot more effeciently. Im actually using technology right now. Thankfully this computer isn't examining and scanning my face right now (as far as I know). I don't think we should go this far and use this software at schools. Students need privacy, it won't change our opinions about school work, and plus its also probably petyy expensive. Students are entitled to their own privacy. In the artile is said, "For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow." The last thing you need in school is a bunch of soap ads poppping up because someone made you laugh but the computer thought you were laughing at the ads it was showing you. We dont want a computerscanning our faces everytime we are using it. Its just disturbing to think that this machine is studying every muscle movement in your face to know how you feel. Of course most kids are going to be bored if they're doing school work on the computer. How is the computer going to change that? Its pretty useless if you really think about it. It will just get annoying after a while. If youre confused you could just ask the teacher instead of exaggerating a confused look until the computer recognizes it. This software is also probably pretty expensive. We would have to pay for not only the software but also new and better computers because as it said in paragraph 7,"Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile." This means that we would need a really, really nice computer to run this software. Schools don't have enough money to buy a software that just reads peoples emotions. In conclusion I don't think schools need this at all. Its pretty useless because it won't give us students privacy because it will just be sitting there scanning us the whole time we are on our computers, It definitely won't help us with our boredom, and its probably way too expensive. Nobody wants to be baying a bunch of money just to know Tim was 40 percent happy on wednesday after lunch. This software just a waste of money.

Dear State Senator, I, PROPER_NAME, think that we should not abolish the electoral college! The Electoral College has been used for many years and not been a problem til now. In my opinion, people are just getting upset because the nominees they voted for didn't get elected. "The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachroninsm, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be [overruled] by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner". (paragraph 15 in source 3) It's the electors who elect the president, not the people. When we vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors. Some people don't know that. Though each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee it is rarely betrayed. It is possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. Yet that has rarely happened. The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president anyways. Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign, to really listen to the competing candidates, knowing that they are going to decide the election. They are likely to be the most thoughtful voters, on average, (and for the further reason that they will have received the most information and attention from the candidate, and the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election. In conclusion, many people are unaware of the election rules. They don't know what they are talking about when it comes to political stuff. Therefore, you should not listen and keep the electoral college! Sincerely, PROPER_NAME

Luke went on the trip to Europe because he wanted to help other. So luke took some time off of work to help the city that had been messed up from World War 2. In the passage it says that,''Luke and Don sign up to help Europe by shiping supply and other goods over sea. luke worked with the (UNRRA) helping with supply. luke and Don were known as a Seagoing Cowboys in the program. In my opinion luke did the right thing because he's helping other people in other places. In the passag it says that,''In China luke help and took care of animals. Luke went to Greece and brought 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them. So luke is helping people,animals,and he is helping with supplys. Luke is travling from sea to sea helping people and working very hard. So these are my reasons on why I think that luke did the right thing. Also when luke took a trip to help people he also help countries who left in the ruins. In the passage it says that,''It was 1945,World War ll was over in Europe,and many countries were left in ruins. luke and don sign up to help people in those areas. Also Luke did what he needed to do to help.

Driverless cars are pretty helpful, although they have some flaws but that doesn't stand away from the good points of driverless cars being invented. The idea of cars that can function without a driver doing anything whatsoever is something that has been dreamed of since the first invention of cars, next to the whole flying cars ideas. Cars operating with barely any human involvement of touching the steering wheel is creative. The idea also lets the driver be able to handle things without having to stop the car. Plenty things would be made easier in the driving world due to this invention. Cars like the Google car are very helpful by stopping accidents from accuring. The car warns the driver when the vehicle is in trouble for example: backing into an object, upcoming highways, and even if a car crash is ahead. Speaking of warnings, the car gives notifications to the driver when they need to take over. Tthe car is an excellent way to prevent accidents that may happen. There was also be less problems of texting and driving because the car will do most of the driving. The thought of self-driving cars have always been around so why throw away the chance of it becoming reality? The cars have been in the making since the early 2000s and even beforehand but the technology wasn't developed enough for the plan to become reality. After all these years of waiting to create driverless cars it has finally been created. The car that could only be thought of in dreams are now existant in reality. With the car being able to function without the need of a human unless an emergency is coming then the driver can pretty much relax. If the driver has a baby then they can tak care of the baby while the car is going. The driver will have less chances of stress with a car that can dive itself. Even if the car does get into an accident, it won't be your fault therefore you will have no worries of having to pay off the accident, most of the fault will be on the manufacturers. Traveling will be made much easier by the help of self driving cars. You can travel for hours and you won't have to worry about getting tired from the constant wheel turning when your car does it for you. Adding on to traveling with the car you won't have to pay hundreds of dollars like you would if you decided to go by plane or train. The only payment you would have to use would be to refill the gas tank. In conclusion, creating the driverless cars would be a big movement for the car and driver world. The car could prevent car crashes which would make the driver have to spend hundreds of dollars on repairing the vehicle. Traveling would be made 100% easier and faster with the self driving car. The car crash rate would also go down quite the bit. Self-driving cars would be an amazing addition to the car industry.

A with less cars would be a better world because people would not emit as much harmful gas to distroy the o-zone. the two reasons the world would be better without cars are people would walk more which means that people would get more exersice. the other reason that it would be better to have a world with less cars is people would spend less money on cars and gas. The first reason it would be a better world without cars is that people would walk more and the people that walk would get more exersice and be healthier. the other reason it would be better to walk is that people that have anger and stress problems would not have to be stuck in traffic and would not get angry over people doing stuff to them wen they'er in traffic and people who get stressed would not have to worry about people running into them or people cutting them off. the last reason that it would be better for people to walk is that people would be healthier because they would not have all the fumes from the cars in thier face and would not be inhaling it so they not have lung problems in the futer because they were breathing the fumes. The second reason it would be better world with out cars is that people would spend less money on gas which means that people wuld have more money for other things. also if people didn't spend money on gas and cars is people would not have to make car payments so they wouldn't stress about not having enough money to pay the car payment or the car getting reposesed. the last reason it would be better to not spend money on cars and gas is if people didn't spend money on that stuff they would be able to spend money on running shoes so when they walk to work or whereever they are going they can wear the proper shoes. In a world with less cars people would be so much better off because of all the things they don't have to spend money on. also the world would not get as damaged because of all the things cars emit.

Computer driven cars, the future of cars, but is it safe or dangerous. i think dangerous for three reasons. first off what if the computer driven car malfunctions or is even hacked. secondly will they make new driving laws for these computer driven cars. and last but not least if its safe then why is it illegal. Computer are the future,but is it for cars. Computer driven cars can be quiet dangerous. What if the car malfuntions. Feor example, your driving in the woods heading for your camping spot, but the car dosen't want to turn. Your heading for a tree and you cant pull the stearing wheel what happens next? Or what if your car is bieng hacked by an unkown person. how would the car company fix it. Will they make new driving laws? As stated in the story"New laws will be in order to cover liability in case of an accident". "Who is held responsible the driver or the manufature". In the story it states "Presntly, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the safe car has a human driver in controlat all times". I know here already tired of the regular driving laws. If computer driving cars are so safe why is it illegal? in the story it states "As a result in most states it is illegaleven to test computer-driven car." That dosent sound safe to me. It also states "manufatures believe that more states will follow as soon as the cars are proven to be mor reliably safe." meaning that there not safe now. Still think that computer driven cars are still safe? i didnt because of my three reasons. What if the car malfuntions or get hacked? Will they make new laws? If it is safe why is it illegal?

Limiting Car Usage Cars have no doubt become the leading mode of transportation all over the world. Due to the amount of exhaust that they give out, there is a negative effect with greenhouse gases. Many places in the world have become very polluted due to the pollution that the cars give off. Did you know that Paris, the beautiful city we all know and envision in our minds was once so air polluted that they had to ban driving!? Only certain vehicles were allowed on road at times and eventually when things cleard up they let people back on the road. Vauban, Germany. A little suburban town that has given up automoblies altogether! "Im much happier this way, when i had a car i was always tense," said Heidrun Walter, a mother of two. Bicycles have become a part of their daily lives and as a result, resteraunts, clothing stores, grocery, and other shops have all sprung up on the streets in walking disatnce making everything easliy more accesible. The town itself is very clean, since they don't use automoblies the effect of pollution is drastically different. In Bogota, Columbia-There is a program  that they do every year called " Car-free day ." Car free is a day in which everyone in Bogota..you guessed it, doesn't drive. The people of Bogota care for their enviorment and see a need to take a day out their lives to try and improve it in the slightest. Their determination of upholding this tradition has even brought in someof the neighboring countries to partake in this car free event. The United States is one of the leading countries in the world for car pollution. Peaking in miles driven in 2005, President Barack Obama took a stand. President Obama set high goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions. Recent studies have shown that the yearly average of miles driven is decreasing and it is believed that if this trend continues, it will benefit the rest of the country. Cars are a majorform of pollution in the world we live in today, if we all just took some time out of our lives and rode a bike to work one day, or walked to the park, we might be able to stall the slow defeat of our planet. People desrve to live in a clean well taken careof enviorment and the first step to making that enviornment the way which we desire..is you.    

I honestly think that having driverless cars are not a very smart idea. i mean, how will kids know that our generation use to manually drive around with our hands and feet. Also the enjoyment we had doing so. The google cars they have made that are able to drive on their own can make a human being lazy beacuse the driver would be effortless to drive around and could let their car drive. People can talk about how drivers can fall asleep while manually driving. But how about these google cars? They said in the article that a google car can drive on its own , BUT it can still alert the driver to take control of the car when its around complicated traffic , such as navigating through roadworks or accidents. If the google car was meant to be driverless it would not have to alert the driver to take control in situations it was built and designed for. So the driver should not be alerted to do such a thing. I think we should keep driving the way we are today. Drivers are more focused driving themselves instead of being lazy , because no driver wants to get in an accident themselves. So they're more alert and have better drivning experience everyday they drive to a certain destination. Also the senors we have today are more enough because they alert us when another car is to close to us. We do not have to be alerted when to drive. I do think that we need better brakes that will not be worn out or broken. But instead people want to make driverless cars. How about making cars that dont have to run on gas or be to costly ? Indistructable tires? Car glass that don't break? Airbags that don't harm or knock people out? All of these harms and they are worried about how to establish a driverless car. The car can alert you to take control, but what if you forget some of your driving expirence or get startled? Also what would happen if the car does not alert the driver? Can it alert the driving if the tires need more air pressur? Or an oil change ? I think that should be something to conern about the just making future drivers lazy to drive around. I honestly think that having driverless cars in the future are even more dangerous than the cars we use today.

"'All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change,'said David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America.."(para.7).There's so many advantages if we limit care usage. For instence, more money saved,more space,pollution, and no traffic. To start off, in the article"In German suburb, life goes on without cars", by Elisabeth Rosenthal,it states "car ownership is allowed but there are only two places to park-large garages at the edge of development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home." (para2) in other words its expensive. Then it goes on and says, "'when I had a car I was always tense. I'm much more happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles ..." (para3).Ms. Walter is more calm now that she doesnt have a car. In paragraph 5 more reasons come up. "...is a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes....Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe...and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." One of many causes of greeenhouse gas is cars. Next, "in previous bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highays and only 20 percent to other transport."(para9)which means that its expensive and most of this things money is wasted on is things that cars need. To continue, the author, Robert Duffer, of "Paris bans driving due to smog", he states "after days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city."(para. 10) this tells us that cars are dameging the air we breath. Smog gets around fast,"Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France,after five-days of intensifying smog...[The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world."(para 14) To add on, Andrew Selsky which wrote,"Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", says "...leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams"(para20) basically theres traffic. In paragraph 24, "' It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,' said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife". The Selsky states, "parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have be replaced by broad, smoth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic;and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up" now you can get to your places faster with no traffic and its a smoth trip and good for business. Furthermore, Elisabeth Rosenthal writes in her article, "the end of car culture" some advantages. "president Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get fortuitour assist from an incipient shift in American behavior: recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars,driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by."(para29) In other words not many people are driving anymore its not "cool" anymore ,if you dont drive you'll fit in more. To summarize,there are so many advantages if you limit car use, such as money saved,more space in the streets,and help keep our air clean.

In today's world, many of us see cars as a necesarry tool used to get us where we need to go in the shortest time possible. However, what many do not realize is how much restricting our usage of the personal automobile will actually help society in the long run. Decreasing our usage of the car will not only cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, but will also improve congestion and see an a boost in the economy of cities and countries around the world. There is no doubt that cutting down on driving will greatly reduce the emission of grennhouse gases. As detailed in "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer, the effect of just one day of reduced driving played a signifigant impact on the amount of smog in Paris, France. The smog which covered the city of Paris rivaled that of Beijing, China, one of the most polluted cities in the world. The cause of the intense fog is thought to be diesel fuel, which is the most commonly used type of automobile fuel in France. Because of this, Paris has a very high smog concentration compared to other Western European capitals. The temporary ban on driving drastically improved the conditions in Paris, and the ban was lifted after only one day. If this idea of reducing the use of automobiles spreaded to other car-dependent countries such as the U.S., there is no telling how much the impact of society on the emission of greenhouse gasses will reduce. Additionally, the increasingly popular idea of favoring walking or biking over driving to one's destination has seemed to have a signifigant impact around the world. In the passage "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky, the capital city of Bogota, Colombia has participated in the Day Without Cars program for three straight years. This has led to an increase in the creation of bicycle paths and cut down on congestion and traffic jams normally common in the city. In addition, the uprising of parks and recreation centers has also helped to boost the city's economy. However, this program has not been restricted to Bogota, as many people from countries around the world have come to see the event. This has the potential to become an internationally now phenomena, which will greatly improve the health and well-being of the people of the world. New bicycling opprotunities will mean no longer getting in traffic jams and will reduce stress and congestion in the long run. In conclusion, the limiting of car usage would have a profound impact on our society, not only on pollution and the envorinment, but on our personal well-being. The limiting of our dependency on cars has had a great effect on the emission of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, and smog has the potential to be removed from modern cities all together; the economy would also benefit, as fewer cars means fewer roads needing to be built and an increase of bicycle trails, parks, and shopping centers in walking distance of neighborhoods. Overall, the limiting of car usage would have a fantastic impact on society and our world as a whole.

I feel the use of technology would be a good thing for a classroom.There are many things that would inprove the students abilities and the classroom environment. In paragraph one of this article its tells us how it measures the emotions you are feeling in percentages and lets others know. Using this technology would help the teacher know if the students in the classroom are taking in and understanding the information being put out. With this the teacher can expand the thought or just explains more clearly on what is to be done; the students will not have to worry about not understanding or being afraid to ask a question. Many people are scared to ask a question or for futher explaination in fear of being made fun of or others just thinking you are dumb.Yes, it is good to ask questions in a class but if you are just having trouble doing so, the teacher will already know and just pull you aside later, also ask what was not being understood. The new technology can also help identify if the teacher is doing his or her work well enough, not just giving any old lecture or paper work for no real reason . Therefore, if every student is doing well and understanding everything and teachers are doing their jobs right, students will have better grades. They will have better test scores in class room tests and even standardised tests and that is a big win for the students , parents,and schools.So, with that being said technology will just get bigger and better and help the society and its people to do better even in a class room.

In1998, new high resolution images and 3D altimetry from NASA's Mars Global Survey, a spacecraft revealed the a face on mars. Some believe that the face was created by aliens, others including NASA, and myself believe that it is just a natural landform. NASA research states in the article that it is just a huge rock formation, and there is common landforms around the American West. Also web surfers get dissapointed when what they been waiting for is really just a land formation. When NASA unveiled the image for all to see they caption the picture "huge rock formation." They also stated "human face..formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." They also state "huge rock formation that resembles a human head." This shows that NASA believes and told the public that what some think is created by aliens is really just a natural landform. Similar pictures have been found common around the American West, that look just like the "face" on Mars. The article states that "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa--landforms common around the American West." Garvin states "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the snake River Plain of Idaho." This shows that NASA compares the face to comman landforms already found and explains they are very similar. Thousand of anxious web surers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, only to reveal a... natural landform. They text states "there was no alien monument after all." The text also states that "web surfers who waited so long for what they thought was going to be great was really just land." This shows that the web surfers where disapointed in there find, and there hopes not becoming realality. However, those who say it is created by aliens disaprove with the fact that the "face" is just natural landforms. The text states "but not everyone was satisfied. The face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winte in April '98--a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." Also the text goes on to state "some people think the face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars-- evidence that NASA would rather hide." These examples from the text show and help prove why people belive they were created by aliens and isnt a natural landform. So as you can see NASA and myslef belive that the face is simply just a natural landform for many reasons proven. NASA states its just a huge rock, web surfers where dissapointed in there findings, and similar landforms have been found that match up to the face. Little do people know, the face is actually just a natural landform and not a alien creation like some hoped to find. Alien creation? Silly nonsence. Natural Landform? Very understandable!

Cars have been used and started to rise since World War II. Vehicles have trended to make them fit our life and culture. But there has been so many tragic events taking place because of the use of cars and people debates whether cars should be used or not. It will be a great idea to limit cars because it will protect the environment, cut difficulties while on the road and improve safety and business. Initially, it would be a great option to limit cars because it will protect the environment. Cars are used to make it easier to transport places but it does not help protect the world around. Cars cause damage to the whole atmosphere and can harm many. For instance, in Paris, people are fined for driving because of the smog polluted in the air. According to the passage "Paris bans driving due to smog", Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals. The use of driving vehicles can make it difficult to live in the world. Furthermore, limiting the use of cars will be a big advantage to the world because it can cut difficulties while on the road. The less use of cars will lead to better circumstances while on the road. It will be easier for buses or delivery trucks to do their tasks quicker and more efficient. For example, in Bogota, many parks and sports centers have been replaced with smooth sidewalks which cut rush hour situations and traffic. The roads will be wider and more smooth for the environment. Moreover, it would be a great idea to limit the use of cars because it will improve safety and business. Most instances when cars weren't used in different regions of the world, it led to the improvement of businesses but also better safety. In Vauban, having less placement for cars created more safety for customers to go into their desired place. It also has been more accessible and compact to public transportation. Limiting less cars progresses the world all around. In conclusion, it will be a huge advantage to limit the use of cars because it will protect the enviormnent, cut difficulties while on the road, and improve businesses and safety. Using less cars will not only protect ourselves but protect the world that we live in.

We as a people should get rid of the Electoral College, and change it to popularity vote to elect the president. People dont vote for the president but instead vote for state electors, And all together the Electoral College is just not fair for the voters. When people vote they should vote directly to whom they want president instead of letting state electores vote for whom they want without our vote counting. "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect th president." (Bradford Plumer, Mother Jones) Which is stating that we only vote for representatives of our state, at which vote for they want for president. "Because each state cast only one vote, the single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much to say as the 55 represatives from California, who represent 35 million voters. Given that many voters vote one party for president and another for Congress, the House's selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people." (Bradford Plumer, Mother Jones) So the voters really don't get to vote who they want, it's the representatives who vote for the president they want. "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational... It's hard to say this but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college!" (Bradford Plumer, Mother Jones) The electoral college is unfair to the voters and should be taken out of the voting process all together. Most people would agree and say that the electoral college is unfair to the voters because your vote really dosn't matter it's all up to the state represetative to vote who is president, and thats why the electoral college should not exist.

Cars! Cars! Cars! Some might say that you cant even live without them. Which is why cars and motors have become a serious problem all through out the globe. Passages like  " The end of a car culture" Source 4; By Elisabeth Rosenthal and " Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in bogota " Source 3; By Andrew Selsky, Explain and show to the reader that The pollution that is caused by engines have become a serious problem through out the world and we need to limit car usage now! Source 4, Explains The actions that our president Barack Obama is Taking to make the world a safer And (Cleaned air place). By limiting car use it can help us tramendisly but what you do to make that happen is key. As written, Studies show that americans are purchasing fewer cars, licenses, and also driving as more and more years go by. Some might have a different opinion or perspective and say that cars are their life and that is the only way they will function. While others see and appreciate the advantages of limiting car usage. Many things including Less traffic, less accidents , more safety , and better health come as positive outtakes for lessening auto-motive use. One thing sup0risingly that is good for your health as a result of no cars is cycling. "New yorks bike sharing program and its skyrocketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new priorities". I can see that just by leaving your car once a week at home and using a bike, You can get a workout , arrive at your destination quicker, and you might even get into the habit of leaving your car at home more often. So it does'nt hurt to try it once, Plus you can also save about thirty bucks which is fine by me and my wallet. Source 3 , Explains the rules and laws that some countries are making to prevent less auto use and cleaner air. Andrew emphasizes on the progam in Bogota,Columbia that makes a mandatory car-free day(two days) throughout the well populated city. Over all it was a great turn out ,but know matter where you go their is always going to be some of those hard headed people who just dont like the whole concept. Which of course those violators are fined with twenty-five dollars. I think this was a great idea in showing that the city does care about the enviorment and care about the peoples safety and health." It is a Good opportunity to take Away stress and air pollution..." as well. Cars! As much as we love them they are some what damaging so it wont kill you if you just give it a rest and try cycling or walking ,you can benefit from it in many ways and it might even save some ecosystems. Lets try and limit car usage , It wont hurt us!               

In 1976, scientists were surprised to see a rock formation, somewhat resembling a human face, on Mars. When NASA showed the picture of the interesting formation to the public with a caption describing it as a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose and mouth," however, many people considered this a definite sign that there was life on mars, maybe even an ancient civilization that had once unhabited the red planet, but this is not true. First off, while some skeptics and conspirac theorists believe NASA would like to hide any evidence, defenders of the NASA budget say that they wish there was an ancient civilation. More than that, NASA would have no logical reason not to inform the public of major discoveries, such as discovering life on another planet and there is no evidence to prove or explain why they would want to hide such important information. Secondly, while some people consider the formation to be some sort of alien structure, NASA considers the "face" to be nothing more than a mesa, which is a logical thing to think considering the fact that mesas aren't uncommon on Earth either. Jim Gavin, the chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, even compared the mesa on Mars to one here on Earth saying "It reminds me most of Middle Butte ine hte Snake River Plain of Idaho. That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." In conclusion, the "Face on Mars" may be interesting to look at, but the fact that some consider it to look like a human face is mere coincidence. If NASA were to discover somethhing so ground-breaking, they would probably inform the public, but the "Face on Mars" is nothing more than a mesa that could have just as easily been on Earth.

Car usage to some people doesnt matter. Some people say that they would rather walk than drive a car. Heidrun Walter said ''when i had a car i was always tense. Im much happier this way". Most normal people would rather ride in a vehicle but these people have a good point. Not only does it make them happier to walk but it also is better for the enviornment. There is less air polution. The biggest thing is smog. Smog is a very big consern in todays socity. After days of near record pollution, paris enforced a partial ban to clear the air of the global city. With no vehicles on the road, that means no smog. Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france, after 5 days of intensifying smog. Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. Diesel fuel was blamed, since france has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in france, compared to a 53.3 percent average of deiselengines in the rest of western Europe, according to reuters. Delivery companies complained of lost revenue, while exceptions were made for plug in cars, hybrids, and cars carring three or more passengers. Public transit was free of charge from friday to monday, according to the bbc. Vauban, completed in 2006, is an example of a growing trend in europe, the united states and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a movement called smart planning."All of our development since world war II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change," said David Goldberg, and official of transportation America. Most people would freak out if they had to loose there vehicles. But if you look at it the way these people do then it wouldnt be that bad. Smog is hurting the world all over. There would be less car accidents. And there would be less gas and oil sources being used. It helps the world and some people said that it makes them happeir and they arent usually as sterssed or mad ever sence the got rid of there cars.  

The "face" on mars is a natural landform and was not made by aliens. I know this because it's just a rock formation. The second reason is NASA would want there to be life on mars because it would benefit them. Finally because the shadows give the appearance of looking like a face. My first reason is it's just a rock formation. In the artcle, it says global surveyor flew over Cydonia and snap photos of it. These pictures were 10 times sharper than the original. Also these showed that it was just a natural landform. It is the mar equivalent of a butte or Mesa. Now I know what some of you are thinking, "What if NASA is hiding something. Well my next reason is NASA would benefit by finding aliens on mars. In the text it said that while defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an alien civillzation. This shows that they would embrace having found aliens because they could make money. NASA wouldn't be hiding anything because they would be missing out. In the text it even said that authors resoned it would be a good way to engage the public an attract more attention to mars. Finally, the face only lookes like that because of shadows. The article says the face only comes from shadows. It gave the illusion of having eyes, a mouth, and a nose. People have traveled as far as we could get; with the best camera and saw that it was just a normal rock formation. In face we have many of these same mesa and butte on earth. The face on mars is is a natural landform and was not made by aliens. This is because it's just a normal rock formation. The next reason is NASA would want there to be life on Mars because it would beneft them. Finally, The "face" is formed because of the shadows on the Mesa. For all these reasons the face on mars was not made by aliens, but is just a regular rock formation

I think that technology is valuable in a classroom because, it is an easier way to learn new stuff. Another way it is valuable is that technology is the most popular advertisment out. Everybody needs one, even if u are a kid. Plus all of the teachers can easly grade your homework right from their computer. They can access anything they need to help students out. We can look up anything on the computer. The main thing about technology is anybody can access anything or anything they want. But Idont think that it will be valuable to read the emotional expressions of students. The reason I think that is because you cant be able to do it. If we could do that then the teachers would know how to control, listen, and be able to instuct whatever they are learning about. But all that i can say is that we need to understand how we can read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom.

The use of this technology (FACS) to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable, because it has evidence that it works on facial expression on what peoples emotions are. I know this because the text states "For example, your frontalis pars muscle raises your eyebrows when you're suprised;your orbicularis oris tightens your lips to show anger." Also "Eckman has classified six basic emotions, hapiness, surprised, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness, and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. It is valuable in a classroom because it can prevent bullying, by showing the teachers what students are feeling if they are sad or angry about something and it can prevent school shootings with students who have "emotional" problems or have thoughts about harming others, basically it can prevent alot of things happening in school n can help students cope or think about hoe they are feeling to effect what type of day they might have. This is why FACS is valuable in a classroom.

The author studies Venus the way some people study science and how others study math and English. The auhtor studies really hard on what he wants and needs to know. Some dangers that it persents would be that not all of Venus is safe and not all of space is safe either. Venus is a worthy planet because it does not have all of man kind on it destroying it or usig it. Venus is a place where some people go to see outisde of our world to see what space really does look like. In parargraph 1 it talks about about of Venues is sometimes called the "Evening Star" and it is one of the most brightest points of light in the night sky. It is also known as Earth's twin because Venus is closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size. It says in paragraph 2 " Each perious mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. In conclusion is states in paragraph 8 " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itslef, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into mnay equally intimidationg endeavors," Thoes words that came from paragraph 8 would probabaly be some what some danger but nit that much.

"A classroom computer could recongnize when a student is becoming confused or bored," said Dr. Huang and also predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This would be ground breaking if children, high schoolers, and even audlts coould use this techonology. It would change how everyone on this plant learns everything. This is very vauble because the computer will be able to tell if you are happy, sad, confused, angry and other emothions. The computer could change its lesson around you and not what it is just programed to do like computers right now. Everyone human on this earth learns differently. Some students are more visual than others and some get distracted more. This program would help everyone equaily. Everyone on this planet learns differently and that is why this program would be so helpful to our education and future on earth. This product would be so valuable to our society today. We need something like this for our education. Everyone would be able to learn how they want to learn and everyone would be given a fare and even learning expericne.

Everybody knows the future is coming and it's already happened to some of us. Driverless cars however, is not at all a good idea for the future what so ever. You can never one hundred percent trust technology, no matter what the case is. Driverless cars are not fully finished, are not truly driverless, and are very unsafe. Driverless cars are not even finished. As stated in the text, "These smart road systems worked suprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." They are very expensive to have all this technology put into the cars. Most of all they can actually steer, accelerate and brake themselves, but only that. It also states that Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by the year 2020, which actually means that we are 4 years away from the "real thing" that is unless they release earlier or later. To add on, the "driverless" cars are not at all truly driverless. The car requires humans to do "human skills" in case the car is having difficulty. As quoted in the 7th paragraph, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills. If the cars were truly "driverless" then why does it require humans to do work. Although, I have to agree that humans need to do all 100% of the work in any type of car no matter what the condition. Driverless cars are very unsafe. You can never completely trust technology no matter how long you have had it or it's been in your life. So many humans in the world text and drive now so imagine how bad it will be once "driverless cars" appear in the future. If the driver is texting and the car needs human skills to navigate through an unknown or unfamiliar terrain, the driver will have no clue because he or her's face will be stuck in a phone or some other type of handheld device. Driverless cars are a not the brightest idea because they are unsafe, not truly driverless, and are incomplete. Everyone needs to focus on driving and the road and not in their cell phones while on the road. Don't be that person that everyone is cautious about because you are unsafe and not cautious. Be safe and don't get a "driverless" car, get a normal car.

Automobiles have proved to be very convenient to our modern day society. It allows people to travel 20 miles in ten to fifteen minutes. By foot, it would take about four hours to travel that distance. Although cars have been beneficial, the limitation of car usage would outweigh the benefits of constantly relying on them. Decreasing the amount of time we spend in them would improve public transportation, improve air quality, and create less stress. Cutting down the amount of car usage would encourage the use of public transportation. According to Source 1, the essentially car-less suburban, Vanbaun, has made public transportation more accessible. Increasing the use of it would decrease the time it takes to commute from place to place. Less cars on the roads mean less traffic. In small towns, not as many people currently use the system on a regular basis. With the limiting of car usage, public transportation could become more popular in suburban areas, not just metropolitan cities. Some may not want to take this form of transportation because it may not meet their sanitary needs. However, if the popularity increases, cities will be obligated to improve the conditions. Public transportation could be the new primary form of transportation if we limit the amount of time cars are allowed to be used. Additionally, a large problem in the world today is air pollution and globabl warming. Automobiles cause the majority of this ongoing problem. Less time spent in the car would eventually lead to better air quality. Source 2 states that in Paris, France the smog in the city was near-record pollution. This caused Paris to enforce a partial driving ban to clear the air. Congestion was cut down 60% after this action was taken. Vehicles release numerous harmful greenhouse gases that we have been trying to reduce. These gases not only harm the environment, but the people as well. New and popular alternatives to the common diesel cars are hybrids and electric cars. Less car usage would result in reduction of pollution. Also, using a car less decreases stress levels. According to Source 3, in Bogota, Colombia, citizens participate in the very popular car-free day. A businessman in Colombia said, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress." Cars do not allow people's mind to stop and rest. A driver's mind is constantly thinking and attempting to get to their destination as fast as possible. If cars were barely used, people could take a serene stroll to their destination, allowing the mind to slow down, think, and relax. Parks and recreation would expand and improve as well due to the smaller vicinity we can reach by foot or bike. New and improved public areas would become more enjoyable, making us less stressed. Stress levels decline as car usage declines. The increased use of public transportation, improved air quality, and lower stress levels all result from the limitations of car usage. As beneficial as a car may be to people, limiting the use of it is more advantageous than not. Car companies are still widely developing as highways and roads are expanding, but our society should go the other direction and find healthier sources of transportation.

Do you trust technology? Everyday we rely on thousands of technologies that perform thousands of different tasks. What if there was a technology that, if not working, could severly injure you or even kill you? Technologies can also malfuncition and not perform the task they were set to do. Computers can freeze and phones can crash and it happens all the time. A driverless car is nice to think about at first. Someone may argue that it could take the pressure out of long car trips and could even prevent drunk driving. In paragraph one it says, "Google cofounder Sergey Brin envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." This sounds nice and the idea sounds like it would work, but people are missing one thing. Technology can fail. Small technologies that fail have little affect on our lives. When a call doesn't go through and your computer freezes it's not the end of your life and it won't hurt you. When you enlarge the scale and start talking about cars being the technology, big things can go wrong. In paragraph eight it says, "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" I think that this quote is a good arguement to why we shouldn't have driverless cars. People waiting at the wheel to drive would get bored and start to play on thier phone or look out the window. When the car needs the "driver" to take over he/ she wouldn't be paying attention or wouldn't be able to respond to the need of the car in time. What would happen if you were on the interstate going seventy miles per hour and the automatic steering on your car went out? We can't rely on technologies especially when it performs such an important role as driving a car. In paragraph four it said, "For starters, they need a whole lot of sensors. Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor." I chose to use that quote because I wanted to show people just how much technology is on the car. Just how much technology that could go wrong. If one of those sensors didn't work you could crash. I think that the whole idea of driverless cars is too risky and too unrealiable. I'm opposed to the idea of driverless cars because of the safety hazards that could generate from the technology failing. I understand that the idea of a driverless car sounds amazing and has so many pros-, but the amount of cons- outweighs the pros-. I do think that driverless cars one day would work and be safe, but I don't see it coming in the near future. Driverless cars sound great, but I don't think we are ready for them yet.

Although driverless cars may seem like a neat idea, I do not believe that we should have them taking us place to place. I think it would be unsafe, and just flat out lazy to do so. For one thing, technology is not always realiable. Majority of people use the internet and other electronics everyday, but that doesn't stop it from crashing or giving misleading information. With that being said, the internet and mapping devicethat would be used in the cars would not always do what they are supposed too. Secondly, say for instant that you are using a driverless car or a rainy day, there will be the need of human skill. I don't believe that if someone who has the luxury of having a driveless car would take that into consideration, they would much rather be on their phones scrolling through social media. They wouldn't pay attention to what is going on outside of the car, and that's how accidents happen. Thirdly, not until much later will just anybody be able to afford a car like that. So there will be a mix of smart cars and regular drivers on the road. Even if the smart cars don't make mistakes, the regular drivers will. Thus, causing way more accidents then what there needs to be. For these three reasons I don't think smart cars should be able to drive us around.

in the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile" the auhor explains that a new peice of technology can calculate a humans emotions called the " Facial Action Coding".But is it really worth the students time to use technology just to learn about theirs or other feelings?. its just a waste of time. The technology can only do one thing as the article shows and its just to show what one's emotion are. In the article paragraph 5 it states that " in fact, we humans preform this same impressive "calculation" every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face". This cleary shows just by looking at a friends face you can tell if they are okay or not, so we dont need a device to do it for us. in paragraph 6 it states " For example, if you smile when a web ad appears on your screen, a smilar as appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow.But if you frown, the next ad will be diffrent". This shows that just a facial expression can chnage a ad , but is it really that helpful?, not many people watch ads as it is, they skip them. in paragraph 6 it also states " most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication". this shows that human communication is nonverbal for a good part but why does emotional communication need to be useful? what would we do with the results we got when we test the emotion device? text a friend and show what youre feeling for a quick second?. students will maybe use it at first , but will get tired of it because it just shows emotions and nothing else. In paragraph 7 it states " your home PC cant handle the complex algorithms used to decode mona lisa's smile". this states your home computer cant show the emotons. So by that means you will need a certain device and that will be expensive. Why would a school spend lots and lots of money just for a dveice that shows emotions thta nobody will enventually use. Also is paragraph 7 it states " these are the instructions for a face that looks happy.... they even indicate the diffrence betweena genuine smile and a forced one". this shows the indication of a forced smile and a real one , but which people can tell if thier friends have a real or fake smile. In conclusion we do not need a device to tell us our emotions. we can tell out emiotions and our freinds can too. This device is a waste of time and money for students. The students will use it a couple of times and wont use it because its programmed only to do one thing and thats to show our emotions. This device is not valuable for students just to show emotions.

Dear Florda state Senator There has been questioning of the Electoral Callege, as you may already know. I wish to give suport on prasurving the Electoral Callege. For the futer reference of this letter alow me to set down some bait for the other points of this letter. I'm wanting to go over the fact of election and favoring. Soon after, I willthe talk about the facts of this college process. Many other subjects will cume up in this letter, so pleas read my points of intrest here. The voting process for a presedant is more realistic when it comes to the Electoral way. The runner up is required to atleast earn a majority of 270 votes.  The Electoral College consists of 538 electors, this being a needed fact for the statment above. A popular vote is as seas in the name, a popularity contest, as to having a resonable way of doing this the Electoral way provides equill and reasonable way to win. The thought of college brings the idea that the runer ups have been edjicated in the workings of the government and state. A popularity contest only implys that the runers are like the football joceys in the college. Though the Electoral College has had by falt winners as such. Obama with a 61.7 percent over Romney with a 51.3 percent. In the acurince of this, it will turn into a popularity contest to settal who the winner is. The only problem of this is becouse of the nuber o  votes being 538, it is possible becouse of the total number of votes being even that tere could be a nation wide tie. In Electoral vue, it has grait points to the voting of bigger states. The senate dicreed in the Constitution, the political weight in large states by population lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment. For example in 2012 Obama scored 29 points from Florida but only 3 points from Wyoming. The larger state had given more points to the winner but the smaller state evened out the lead. In conclution, this brings me to the last point of though. Electoral College is good in the eyes of thousands and it should never hafe to change. As my friends would say why fix something that isn't broke. Thank you agean for your time and have a nice day.

''Are you kidding me, you actually think that figure on mars was created by aliens?'' ''Yeah I do, if it isn't aliens then who or what made that face on mars.'' ''I dont know how that got there, but i'm telling you now it wasn't made by aliens.'' As you can see the three different photos showing the figure on mars was just a misunderstanding. In the 1976 photo it looks blury, but in 1998 and 2001 photos you can see it more cleary. In the article it states '' The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face.'' So that means the clouds made it look like a face. Also during 1976 the pixels on the camera could have been bad so it could't take clear pictures. In the image 3 it shows it more clearly, so that means technology has gotten better. According to the article it says ''Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. That proves that the camera in 2001 was better then the camera in 1976. Nobody will ever know if aliens made that figure on mars that looks like a face. It could have been a butte or a mesa. For example in the passage it states ''There must have beem a degree of surprise among mission controllers back at the Jet Propulsion Lab when the face appeared on their monitors. Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. ''So there, I proved to you that the face on mars was just a mesa.'' ''I don't care what you say im sticking to my opinion.'' ''Okay what ever, I know i'm right and you're wrong.''

Limiting car usage isnt such a bad idea. For starters, it helps keep a friendly enviroment, it also saves money and time for people to get to know eachother and talk a little more. To begin with, limiting car usage would help keep a healthy, clean enviroment. In the article, 'In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars' Elisabeth Rosenthal states that "the Enviromental Protection Agency is promoting car reduced communtities, and legislatures are starting to act, if cautiously." Which shows that less car usage would help protect our enviroment. Not only the enviromental agency, but the government and people agree. Also in the article 'Paris bans driving due to smog' Robert states that "the smog cleared up enough Monday for the ruling French part to rescined the ban for odd-numbered plates on tuesday" giving us the fact that th esmog from the cars was hurting the eviroment and causing smog and reckless driving. Secondly, limiting car usage would would save money and gas. In the article, 'Paris bans driving due to smog' Robert Duffer says that "almost 4,000 drivers were fined-diesles make up 67 percent of vehicles in France." We all know diesles an expensive gas, that more than half of France has to pay for just to get from place to place. It also proves that reckless driving and smog from cars can cause damage to someones pockets with fines. Lastly, reduced driving can help people within the same community, get to know eachother better because your either riding around on a bike or walking, giving you the chance to associate with your neighborhood friends. As stated in the article 'Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota' , "parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven pitted sidewalks; rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new resteraunts and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." which shows that driving had good aspects and helped the communty get along more. In conclusion, thats why limiting car usage would have a good affect on our communities and a good affect on th ewhole world in general, because it helps keep a friendly enviroment, and it saves money and time for family and friends.

I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboy program. It is a program where you get to help people and travel the world. If you like animals you get to help them. Animals such as horses, cows, and mules. You can feed them, and bring water for them, and most of all care for them. Cleaning out the animals stalls and putting food in their bales might be smelly but at least you are doing something to help. You can also have fun. There are so many activities to do with your friends like baseball and volleyball gmes. There is also table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading,and whittling. You would also get to travel around the world to different places to sight see. Examples of that are you could go to Greece seeing the Acopolis, Europe and China, and take a gondola ride in Italy. This trip will make you realize and be aware of the people and counties and their needs. Your helping people meet their needs. The more people helping the less people struggleling to make a living in this world. Their are so many people that do not have breakfast to wake up to, or a warm bed to sleep in, or even toys to play with. That is why we need you. These are reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboy program. There is so much you could do that it is a really amazing opportinity. To help animals, to help people, and traveling learning about different cutures, making new friends and having fun!!

The development of driverless cars should be allowed. Driverless cars would probably make driving safer all throughout the nation. These cars would probably also be easier to handle and make driving more enjoyable. In these days, there is the technology to help smarter cars prosper. Driverless cars may have some challenges but like the article states, these cars would change the world. Driverless cars are much safer than the convential cars that are used today. There are many reckless drivers out there that cause car accidents and deaths just about every day. According to the second paragraph of the article, the driverless cars created by Google have driven over half a million miles without a crash. Driverless cars would operate smoothly and theoretically, they could eliminate the possiblility for human error. Under specfic conditions, some cars have been able to drive independly since 2009. This could imply that it might not be that long before driverless cars start to take over. Driverless cars would make transportation much easier. Since attention would only be needed in a rare state of emergency, the driver can mostly just sit back and relax. According to the eighth paragraph of the article, some manufactureres plan to develop in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. The displays can aslo be used to alert the driver, if necessary. Today, most drivers have to be constantly vigilent for harmful threats on the road. Driverless cars on the other hand, will allow the driver to do something fun and relaxing while being automatically taken to a destination. Modern techonology has allowed driverless cars to be fully developed with less complications. According to the fourth paragraph of the article, Google modified a normal car by adding many different sensors to it. There are also a video camera, automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and motion sensors. The technology has finally caught up to make driverless cars a possibility. Driverless cars may still need modifications because there are still faults in dealing with traffic and roadwork. Despite these challenges, driverless cars are still the best option for transportation in this nation. Cars have been driven for over a century. Enhancing cars to be driverless would start a revolution in transportation. Driverless cars are one of the safest and easiest option for traveling. In just a few years, with manufacturers making more modifications and states modifying some traffic laws, driverless cars will truly change the world.

"Unmasking the face on Mars" "Big News" NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft has found something while circling Mars. But what is it, they have seem to have found a face formed into the rocks. Is this new discovery actually a face or is it just another rock formation. The believers and the non-believers of the face on Mars are waiting anxiously to find out what it is. Is it a rock formation or is it an actual human face, no one knows. The (MOC) has finally released the newest picture which is 10 times sharper than any picture the Viking spacecraft could have taken, and the JPL web seach has revealed tht the face on Mars is actually just another rock formation. Even though NASA has put the picture out there that proves that the face on Mars is not acually a face but just another land formation, there are still some skeptics out there that think taht the theory is true. Skeptics have said that perhaps since on the day the picture was taken was a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet that the alien marking were hidden by the haze. NASA had come to Mars to take a picture of the face at the wrong time and if they were to come another day they might have been able to see that it was an actual face and not just some rock formation. Around the American West there are common landforms know as butte or mesa and they are actually equivalent to the Martian. Could the butte or mesa landforms be know on other planets besides ours? We are able to get the right size because " as a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size" so be comparing the actual size of the butte or mesa to right about the size of the Martian when we do the math. The land formation on earth reminds people most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho " thats a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars". In conclusion the Face on Mars is just another regular plain old natural landform. " So if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even a shack."

Some people think that the Face on Mars was created by aliens but that's not the case. After some research, here are the reasons why it's just another natural landform and not an alien artifact. First, scientists figured it to be just another Martian mesa which was common enough around the Cydonia. There have been plenty before and this is just another one of them and the fact that it looks like an Egyptian Pharaoh is just a coinsidence. Second, on April 5,1998, when Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team took some pictures that were ten times sharper than the first, it showed the face was nothing but a natural landform. There wasn't an alien artifact after all. Nevertheless, on April 8,2001, Mars Global Surveyor took a second picture using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. No matter how or when or where the picture was taken, it showed the face to be a Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa. They are landforms common around the American West. Overall, the Face on Mars is just another landform but we can't really blame people for thinking what they did because alien myths have been around for years and years.But the fact that Garvin said," It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain in Idaho", not only shows but explains that there are many natural landforms on earth and so why can't there be any on another planet, especially Mars because that's a planet that has almost everything that humans need to survive and prosper.

Facial Acting Coding System In the article "Making Mona LIsa Smile" Nick D'Alto talls about a new technology named "Facial Acting Coding System", this type of new technology will identify your students emotions it will tell you if your studetns are happy, sad, angry or in fear. Teachers should be aware if students are understanding our class, if they are enjoying it and most important we shoould know if students are having raugh times in school or out of school. In all schools there is studetns who half the time do not understand a lesson given by a teacher or electronic, students are embearrased to raise there hand and ask for help, students will rather miss the whole lesson and not understand than raise there hand and ask for the help they need. If we have the new "Facial Action Coding System" this would help studetns by grades, they would understand the subject and will be able to do their homework, test and quizzes with out a problem. so that means better grades. Studenys will get bored during a class, when they get bored they will most likely not pay attention and wont do anything. If this technology were to be in classrooms this will help the teachers know when they are not focusing no moe, this would help teachers be better during a lesson. This will benefit the studetns from not paying attention. Many teachers do not know there studetns. They do not know when students are going through something, if you look onlined the suicide percent is high because of bullying, bullying happens in every school. This technology will stop familys from loosing there kids to suicide. Teachers would be aware of studetns emotions and will get to know thre studetns more. In conclusion this new technology will help all schools, teachers and stusdetns.

Did you know that automobile accidents are one of the most preventable causes of death per year? With thousands of people dying for small mistakes, there is need for some change. Surely there is a way to make the roads a safer and more secure environment. Google's driverless cars have driven half a million miles without any individual crashes. I believe driverless cars are the safest path for our future on the roads. Unmanned automobiles have been on their way for a while. These developing autonomous vehicles are using some of the most advanced technologies to keep us away from harm. "In the 1980s automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock wheels." (Driverless Cars Are Coming) The necessary sensors have been in devolopment for over thirty years with improvements along the way such as preventing skids or rollovers. These sensors make the cars easier to operate. Google's modified Toyota Prius has a plethra of new sensors attached to it. Of those, it contains a position-estimating sensor, four radar sensors, a video camera, a GPS reciever, an inertial motion sensor, and a spinning sensor on the roof of the car to make a 3-D models of environments surrounding the car. With all of the upgrades made to this machine, it is a much safer vehicle than it was before and it exerts its dominance in having an untarnished history on the road. The cars may be able to drive themselves but humans can still take control when necessary. If there is ever an environment where the car cannot navigate properly, like an accident or a work zone, the car will require the human driver to take over rather than taking its regular plotted course. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills". (Driverless Cars Are Coming) The notifications for the driver to take control are maximizing the safety of the driver and passengers. Unexpected changes in the path the car has been traveling may require human assistance which shows the driver can still be in control. In conclusion, I believe autonomous cars are the most secure way to travel the roads. They show superior technology and represent our capabilities to the make the roads a safer place. Driverless cars are the way of future transport safety.

How would education change for students if lessons were taught based on emotions? In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto , he informs the readers on a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) which is a computor software that can essentially 'read' or recognize human emotions by observing various facial expressions. He also explains the many ways FACS can improve the development for human and computer communication. This technology would be a great contribution because using it would keep many students in happy/better moods and because it could possibly improve a students performance in an online school setting. Allowing this software to be used by many students could help them maintain a happy mood. In paragraph 6 , D'Alto writes," If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." This type of feature will result in a student having a better experience because they would be more susceptible to having a smile on their face while doing any kind of work that could have been dreadful. But along with better moods, using this technology could also make a better student academically. Another reason this technology should be adapted into many student computers is because it could improve a students performance on tests and schoolwork.The authuor writes in paragraph 6," Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Being able to modify the lesson soley based on whether or not this software can pick up a students emotion is completely genuis. Through this students would be able to learn more efficently while maintaing their focus because the lesson would alter depending on their lack or growth of emotion. This invention can produce many positive outcomes because it has the potential of keeping students happy and working while improving their performance. Many scholars today aren't looking forward to walking into a school building which would put their work ethic at a low, leading them into feeling like school just isn't for them. But if technolgy like FACS could be available to every kind of student the outcome would be mind boggling. All students would feel better and do better in school.

Limiting car use is not a new idea. It has been around for about 10 years now, but there has been a major spike in car usage and carbon-based emissions. Less and less people are using a car, and car sales have also gone in a downward spiral. Company chairman for Ford, Bill Ford, proposed a buisness plan for cities that have no practical use at the Mobile World Congress in Spain. Since even before the recession, less and less people are obtaining their licenses, and there has been an increase in major city populations, where driving is severly discouraged. Changes like these are leading to lower emisssions, improved saftey, conserved resources, and saved time, according to Ford. Between 2001 and 2009, there was about a 23 percent drop in young people getting their license. These numbers are inspiring cities all over the world to make a change and do their part to make a change in the world. The capital of Columbia, Bogata has something known as a "car-free day," where only busses and taxis are permitted to be on the road. Other drivers will face a $25 fine. Even in the rain people continued to not use their car. Two other Columbian cities, Cali and Valledupar, also joined in for the first time this year. Bogota has a population of around seven million people, so even if they stop just a quarter of them from driving, then that could cut down on a lot of carbon-based emissions. In Paris, France, drivers were given 22-euro fines for even numbered license plates on one day, then odd numbered license plates the next. Congestion was down 60 percent, and this was after five days that Paris' emissions could rival those of major cities in China. France's tax policy that makes diesel fuel more viable than gasoline was partially to blame, according to Reuters. Diesel engines make up 67 percent of cars in France, which is much higher than their European counterparts. Compared to other captials, Paris has a much higher particulate matter as well. It had over 30 more micrograms than the next highest, which is Brussels, mostly due to the cold nights and warm days, which would trap carbon. After the smog was cleared, Paris released the ban on certain numbered license plates. Another advantage to having no cars is that we have more people walking or riding their bike. While obesity rates in America have been turned around and are trending in the right direction again, there is always more that can be done. It will get people to be more active, and maybe try to eat healthier so they have more energy to walk to where they are going. There will always be obese people, especially in developed countries where junk food is sold around every corner. But we help those who want to change and be healthier by giving alternative choices instead of sitting while commuting. Of course, it would be ridiculous for somebody to have to walk 10 miles to get to work. Not everything can be perfect. Suburban towns would likely fade out of existance, making large cities larger and more intemit. Cars will never fully vanish. But you can do your part. The next time you have to go to the store that's withing walking distance, take a bottle of water and head out. Greenhouse gasses could be stopped, and it all starts with you.               

We as humans need to get in the habit of not useing car as much us we do. There are many advabtages of limiting car usage because are future is our hand. Study show that car are big part of the green house affect. There are many countrys that are trying to stop the use are automobiles . There are citys ,and towns around the world that have rules that stop you from useing your automobiles many people like it. Country around the world are trying to stop the use of automobies like paris after a day near-record pollution,pairs enforced a partial driving  ban to clear the air of the global city. People that did not leave their cars at home they were fined 22-euro the advantages of limiting car use is that you dont get stuck in traffic , it better for the erath that u live in , and you can save money. In a german suburn it is forbidden to use a automobiles as a result, 70 percent of the familys dont have cars,57percent sold there cars to move there. The people that live in these suburb say that "when i had a car i was always tense. i'm much happier this way". MOre and more citys and towns are starting to do the same. "all of our development since world war II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change' said David Goldberg. If we dont stop useing automobilse we are going to be in trouble. There are many advantages of limiting car usage by this time we can stop useing the car.     

The Seagoing Cowboys is an amazing program waiting to happen. I'm Luke and at first, I was unsure about becoming a Seagoing Cowboy, but now I'm sure I've made the right choice! Many don't truely know what the Seagoing Cowboys is. During World War II, many animals were sick and had a scarce supply of food in Europe. The UNRRA decided that the needed a special position for horses and cows. That is the Seagoing Cowboys. Some people may wonder about the experience and commitment of the Seagoing Cowboys. It is an outstanding experience for anyone! I get the daily benifit of seeing sights in Europe and China like the Acropolis in Greece. I've also rode a gondola in Venice, Italy! What else is on your bucket list? In addition, I've toured an excavated castle in Crete and saw the Panama Canal on my way to China! Any sea lover or animal lover should become a Seagoing Cowboy. It took a few weeks to travel on the Atlantic Ocean from the east coast to get to China. I attended to the animals and feed them in the ships. Many people think that being a Seagoing Cowboy is no fun, all work. You are wrong! We play activites like baseball and volleyball in empty areas. We always enjoy the competative nature of table-tennis, fencing, and boxing when we are off work. Any readers would love to join, as many Seagoing Cowboys love the places a story can take you. Games are a jolly part of any off day with the team. Also, the experience is even more exciting when you bring a friend. Sure, all of the Seagoing Cowboys are your family, but a friend makes the family even closer. Being a Seagoing Cowboy is one of the most rewarding things that has ever happened to me. I believe anyone should be a Seagoing Cowboy if they want. This experience made me get a better grasp on what other countries (and not to metion the animals) need. I hope that ou will be a Seagoing Cowboy because, it is "hays" (days) full of fun!

Limiting Car Use Many cities are now switching to become "car free".  The more that cities do this, we are seeing a decrease in pollution, less automobile related deaths per year, and more resources being conserved. When cities switch to become car free, the pollution levels instantly decreasesd.  Due to the smog and the carbon monoxide emmitions in the atmosphere from cars, there is a hole in our Ozone layer in the atmosphere.  Now that people are banning cars in cities there is much more heathy air to breathe and it is much safer for our environment.  Also when there was more pollution in the air, and it rained, the rain turned in to acid rain causing erosion and killing several plants/animals.  If we could ban cars in more cities in the USA and all around the world, we would be living a much healthier lifestyle. Also, the car free idea makes people much safer, as far as automobile accidents.  Because as the autombiles are banned from the city, the accident rate will go down more even than it already has.  Also Heidrun Walter said "when I had a car I was alwyas tense."  Not having a car, and not having the concern of crashing can relieve your stresses.  It is scientifically proven that when people are less stressed they get more sleep and have less angerment problems.  If cities switched to being car free, people could start living safer and happier. Lastly, being car free, saves vital resources, and fossil fuels.  It takes millions of years to make oils, and gasses in the Earths crust, which we are wasting everyday on automobiles.  If we were able to save these resources, we could perhaps use more in rockets or space travel and maybe find another planet that can sustain our life.  If we were able to achieve this goal of saving resources, we could also all save money.  Imagine not having to pay for gas anymore.  You could be a millionare.  If we stopped using fossil fuels the world could become a much better place. My point is, if we become car free, we could live safer, happier, and more wealthy lives.  If your community went the the mayor and state officials, it could happen for your city.  You could be the start to a revoulution and, start the journey to save humanity.  Not only would you get the bennifets of living safer, happier, and wealthier, but the whole world would be living in a much better place.  Please take this into consideration and make an effort to become "car free".     

Today I -Luke- think you should join the progam i joined called "Seagoing Cowboys progam " . I joined the progam for a certain reson and thats because of a great friend of mine - Don -invited me to join him to go to Europe on a cattle boat . I knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. And at that time in 1945 in Europe the World War II had just ended which ment so many things were ruined i wanted to help out so I joined the Seagoing Cowboys progam .And if your not selfish and care about other people take this opportunity and help out a persons life join not only cause we wan't you to but it would be good for a change if someone you loved lived in a country were distruction had just happened you would join but these people you may not love or you don't know but they are still humans maybe even children still they have lives to live and children to have to keep the population growing. I'm giveing you a great opportunity just think about it consider trying .

Dear Mr. Senator, My names is PROPER_NAME. I am 14 years old, born and raised in the beautiful city of LOCATION_NAME and I am writing to talk to you about the Electoral College. I've done my research, and according to the article What Is the Electoral College? by the Office of the Federal Register, it was first established "in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens." What I understood from that text is that it was made to keep equality and fairness between the government and the people. If that is so, why is it that the people have no say in it? I believe that the election should be based on the popular vote because the people should get what the people want. The Constitution says "We the people, by the people, for the people," yet the people have limited power. I understand that in order to form a more perfect union of our nations, their must be laws and rules and people who govern, as well as enforce, these laws and rules. All I'm asking for is a bit more freedom and power as a citizen of these United States of America. I'm not the only one who thinks this way. "...according to a Gallup poll in 2000...over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." Their has been several cases in which the candidate has "won the popular vote but lost the presidency" (Plumer). For instance, the election in 2000 with Al Gore, where his opponent, George W. Bush, received 271 electoral votes and he received 266, eventhough Gore won the popular vote. Instead of voting for a group of people who vote for us, what's the harm in letting the people choose our nation's leader? The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong by Bradfor Plumer, has a section titled What's wrong with the electoral college in which he questions "Can voters control whom their electors vote for?", to which he replies, "Not always." If "we the people" are supposed to be the one's with the freedom, then we should have the freedom to at least choose who we're going to have as our President. "At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states." (Plumer). Take Mitt Romney, for example. He ran for president in 2012, and, knowing that campaigning down South, where he would already be receiving the votes, would not gain him any electoral votes, he didn't campain there at all. This is why they focus on the "swing" or "toss-up" states, and make the other states feel left out, like "the new president will have no regard for their interests, that he really isn't their president." (Posner) To prevent the states to feel left out and to prevent an injustice such as this one, we should end the anachronism that is the Electoral College. "...The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best." Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO have all agreed on it at one point in time: "Abolish the Electoral College!" (Plumer). Sincerely, PROPER_NAME SCHOOL_NAME CITY_STATE

Driverless cars have been in the news all the time in the past few years. Many advancements have been made in order to make this new technology possible. The continued development of driverless cars will benefit in the world today. Car companies need to keep making progress in driverless cars because it wil eventually lead to a safer way of transportation for all people. Many people die each year in car crashes. Most of these are due to distracted drivers doing things like texting and driving. Driverless cars would greatly reduce the number of these accidents. The article gave details talking about how driverless cars could be activated to take over driving when the driver needs to do something like send a text message. A driverless car is just another high-tech safety feature a newer car could offer just like air bags. Nearly all car buyers are influenced by how safe their car is and how expensive it is. The price on a car with this technology is unknown right now but it may drive many buyers away with a high pricetag. For many people though, safety is a bigger concern over price. People would rather be safer driving around even if it did cost a little more. They would be attracted to a driverless car which could assist them when they needed on the roads. Safety is a major concern in cars and new driverless cars could help improve road safety greatly. As well as safety concers, the roads need to improve also to further the driverless car experience. There is a large amount of progress that is still to come in order for these cars to be safe. As the article refered to, the roads need to be smarter as well. This was the first way that there were strides made toward driverless cars. According to the article, these pratice tracks with smart roads sending signals to each car worked perfectly. The only problem with this idea was the amount of money needed to fund this project. Companies are already spending large sums of money to make cars with newer better technology. Why not focus some of that money on making these smart roads which would help the driverless cars run. Obviously it is not reasonable to install this technology on all roads, but if it is on highways, busy roads, and throughout cities it would make a difference. This would help prevent drivers from having to take control of their cars due to the car avoiding tough situations altogether. Overall, smarter roads would help these cars and make them better for the people around them. Lastly, people are always wanting the newest and best technology advances pout there. Each year millions of people swarm to get a new version of the iPhone. These driverless cars would be the iPhone of car industry. Cars have not changed much in the past one hundred years. People put in air bags, seat belts, or navigation systems but nothing major. A driverless car would be something major that no one has ever seen before. Boat loads of people would want to be the first to own this new technology and not have to even drive their own car. Many would see the appel in being a passanger in your own car. These newer driverless cars would be loved by many buyers and sell like hot cakes which is why they need to be manufactured. In conclusion, driverless cars are becoming a reality that will be loved by many. It is more of a safety feature for many drivers which will help to reduce the amount of accidents. With newer technology being created and used, the cars and roads will both need to be improved before these cars can work well out in the everyday world. Millions of people around the world will flock to car dealerships to buy this new technology though. Driverless cars will change the car industry for the better. This is the future of transportation

Being a teen, half a year from getting his license, getting a car is the one thing that benefits being sixteen. But is a car really such a good idea. There are many reasons why having a car is a good idea, but is it possible that the cons of having one out weigh the pros? First things first, a car is the most efficient way to get from point A to point B. It travels fast and most cars now a days have saftey features that prevent serious injuries from an accident, unless the car was being missused in such a way that death is a possibility. So why could it be possible that people are rethinking their decision at buying a car? Well the most reasonable answer of course... money. The amount of money spent on a car each year from insurance to physical damage or new parts is outrageous. So much money could be saved from using bike or bus to get where ever need be. Who doesn't like saving money, this year alone there are millins of people unemployed and can't afford a car so why get a job just for one? That is one of the biggest reasons not getting a car could be a possibility. Another reason to not buying a car could be to keep the body and the enviroment healthy. Not using car to go everywhere would definitily leave the possibility of getting more in shape. Using bike, skate board, and even walking/running. Obesity rate in america is at an all time high. Not only because of cars but because of fast food places and other junk foods possible. Keeping the body in shape is a great pro to not having a car. Also keeping the enviroment healthy is a great factor to not having cars. As seen in source two smog is an over developing threat to the enviroment due to the carbon and diesel left by cars. This not only hurts the enviroment that needs to be protected but causes an inconvieneince to the population due to the smell of the gas and hte wat it blocks light. This is something that needs to be stopped. In conclusion, cars not only cause an inconvieneince to the enviroment but can harm the body as well. Also saving money could be a factor in not buying a car due to insurances and mechanics not having to be paid. Think right America, this could be the savior.

Driving has many perks to it, its easy, gets you there faster. But do to all of this driving there are also downsides to it. Driving benefits us, but not driving also has its benfits as well. The advantages of not driving are high, such as less pollution, you save more money. And to be honest it might just be the end of car cultures. People in an upscale community in Vauben, Germany are giving up their cars. Why? you might ask. Because street parking, driveways, and home garages are forbidden in this experimental new district. If you do own a car, you will have to pay a fee to park it on the outskirts of town, and quite frankly many people can not afford that, so they do it the natural way. Which in turns benefits them because they get plenty of exercise. Continuing on, paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the city. The air was so foggy because of the fuel that they used which was diesel fuel. Another perk of limited driving use is that less pollution gets into the air. All of this driving puts smoke into the air, and makes it a very unhealthy environment. Breathing in all of that really affects your lungs and so forth. The smog cleared enough monday for the french party to discard the ban for that day until next time. Many countries are trying the ''car free day''. Such as Bogota,Columbia,millions of columbians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during car-free day. The goal was to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. ''Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution", said businessman carlos Arturo Plaza. Many countries are excited about this and say that its a revolutionary change. If many people try this out and see what the benefits are, then they will know that maybe just maybe that this might be best.      

I believe that through the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," that the author has built an exellent argument for why we should explore Venus. I say this because throughout the article the author points out many of the challenges that would come up durring exploration, as well as potential solutions to them. In paragraph three the author tells us that no previous spacecraft has been able to survive for more than a few hours. The author counters this problem in paragraph seven when they show us how simplified electronics made from silicon carbide last for weeks in simulations of Venus's conditions. Another time the author shows us some of the most challenging problems with exploring Venus is in paragraph four when she talks about he clouds of sulfiric acid, the 800 defree Fahrenheit temperatures, volcanoes, earthquakes, lightning strikes to probes surface and atmospheric pressure much greater than here on Earth. They go on to explain, in paragraph five, a solution to this problem would be to make vehicles that would fly thirty miles above the landscape where the conditions are nowhere near as hostile with temperature of 170 degrees, and air pressure similar to Earth. This solution not only solves the problems of being on the surface but also comes with the advantage of having solar power. In paragraph six the author states that from the thirty mile height above the the vehicle could not easily photograph the surface or take samples of the planet. She debates this in the same paragraph when they tell us that scientist are currently working on machinery that could contribute meaningful knowlege about Venus. In conclusion trying to explore Venus cold be potentially dangerous, but possible. All of the problems the author has shown us have potential solutions, and the exploration could contribute to the knowlege of Venus. I Believe that because of this, the author has made an excellent argument as to why we should explore Venus.

If I was a scientist at NASA discussing the Face with someone who thinks it was created by aliens I would tell them it was not created by aliens. That's how it was formed just because it's formed that way doesn't mean it was created by aliens. I believe it was just formed like that and there's nothing wrong with it being formed like it's formed because in the article it says, a "huge rock formation which resembles a human head formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose,and mouth". First of all, In May 24,2001 in the artcile it says," It was twenty five years ago something happened around Mars. Viking 1 which is NASA's spacecraft was circling the planet, snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2, when it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face". Secondly, It also says in the article," Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the images appeared on JPL web site, revealing a natural landform. Thirdly, There was no alien monument after all." But not everyone was satisfied they needed more evidence to believe that there were no aliens that created the Face on Mars. Lastly, the Mission controllers prepared to look again and make sure that aliens didn't create the Face on Mars It was hard work but they did the mission anyways. If I was a scientist that's what I would discuss about the Face on Mars because I feel like that it wasn't created by aliens it was just a natural landform like the article stated. I believe it was formed like that because of God he forms things not aliens. That concludes what I would discuss if I was a scientist discussing about the Face on Mars and who thinks it was created by aliens.

The "face on Mars" is a natural landform. There was not enough evidence to prove it was a face, but there was enough valid evidence to prove it wasn't. First it had shadows. The shadows made an illusion giving it a mouth and a nose. The text says shadows made it look like an Egyptian Pharoh. The text says Martian mesas are common around Cydonia. If mesas are common couldn't this just be another one. Mars Global Surveyor flew over and MOC took a picture showing it was a natural landform. Still, people weren't pleased. People said alien markings were hidden by haze. The MOC went back and took more than one picture still showing a natural landform. The landform showed the equivalence of a buttle. Some would say it's all part of a government plan. Then why would they waste time, energy, and resources to take multiple pictures. Garvin even said "It's not easy to target Cydonia." He said, "In fact, it's hard work." The text compared it to the Middle Buttle in the Snake River. The face did in fact gain popularity.

As technology continues to advance, cars are seeing advancements in safety and driving capabilities that go further than what the driver can do. Cars the can sense when the car needs to break if the driver is distracted. Brakes that are anti-lock which means they distribute different amounts of braking pressure to wheels that may have more traction to prevent loss of control. All of these things are very good for cars and keeping drivers safe but are we close to seeing the "Driverless Car"? Cars have features now that can help or completely park themselves with the use of sensors. Many helpful gadgets that may help if human error occurs and can even prevent collisions. But then you have to also consider if this technology were to fail or have glitches that could be very dangerous. We can not know how these "smart cars" will age and how we can update the technology in them. It is definitely possible to create a self-driving car. Many different organizations have succesfully done it but on closed tracks. These tracks do not have the real world complications that can arise such as road work or accidents that cause the car to go on alternate paths because the original one is blocked. This is when the human must take over and redirect the car. Although there is this talk of a car that can drive without a human, we have not seen a car that is reliable and safe enough to be trusted without the driver being ready to take over when needed. If the driver has to sit at ready all the time then how is it a driverless car? As a driver, I know what I am capable of and I feel best when I am driving and I am in control. It would take a whole lot of trust for me to just turn my car on autopilot and let it take over considering there are many things that can happen while you are driving down the road. Many questions come up, such as, Will the car react in time? Will the technology even know to react? Will the car safely and controllably avoid whatever obsticle is thrown it's way. All these things change if the driver is sitting back not driving because the car apparently can do it all by itself. Eventually, in the future, it is very possible to see cars with an autopilot function or other self-driving techniques but we are a long way from cars driving without human help. Laws in all but four states make it illegal to use a car that drives itself because, "lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers" (Paragraph 9). So it is obvious that we have a ways to go from a legal standpoint until you will see cars driving themselves on these American roads. This set aside, the advancements in technology is doing wonderful things in the safety category. Cars can avoid collisions or alert drivers if they make mistakes like going over the center double yellow lines. This helps prevent the awful head on collision of two cars. In conclusion, we are not terribly far from cars driving themselves. It is more a safety and trust concern rather than the technology being there. Cars will drive themselves more and more but with the aid of the driver always being there and capable of taking over at any time. But does this make them self-driving if the driver must be present and paying attention at all times? Why not keep their attention by just letting the driver, you know, DRIVE?

I am against the devleopment of smart cars. Although the development of smart cars has advanced greatly, people cannot relax with these "driveless" cars and still would have to drive around work zones and accidents. I am also against driveless cars because the laws dealing with car accidents would have to be revised. When the technology of these smart cars fail and people get injured or killed, the law has to decide if the accident was the fault of the manufacturer or the driver. Drivers cannot sit back and relax in these "driveless" cars because these smart cars still require the skills of human hands to navigate around work zones and accidents. This means that smart cars would require the attention of humans. So drivers can not relax with these smart cars and wait for their turn to drive because these smart cars would still require human skills to drive. The laws would have to be revised around accidents involving driveless cars. Although precautions are made to prevent smart cars from having an accident such as sensors, the possibility of people getting into accidents in these smart cars is not entirely gone. Even if these driveless cars are proved to be more reliably safe in the future, laws would have to be revised and new laws would have to be created for accidents involving these driveless cars. When the technology of these smart cars fails and people are injured or killed, the laws would have to make the decision if the manufacturer or the driver was at fault. Drivers cannot not relax in these "driveless" cars because these smart cars still require the skills of humans to navigate around work zones and accidents. These smart cars still need the attention of humans, meaning people woudl need to wait for their turn to drive. Laws would also be revised adn new laws woudl have to be created in order to decide if the manufacturer or the driver is at fault in accidents involving these driveless cars. I am against these smart driveless cars because these smart cars are not entirely safe nor reliable.

Is this photo an alien artifact or just a natural landform? This is just a natural landform,for one we have facial looking landforms on are planet, why cant there be on other planets? Also if this was true, NASA wouldn't hide this because if they were to discover ancient civilization they would earn alot of money. To start off there are different looking landforms on are planet why can't there be others. In the first set of pictures it shows the landform changed,so a face wasn't there to begin with,it was forming over time. Also sometimes when the human mind is told something it would try to shape together to form what was said, so this could be just a natural landform and your mind is changing it. Also NASA would not keep this a secret if alien activity was found in this area,if anything NASA would make alot of money off of this discovery if it did have to do with aliens. But if NASA wanted to keep it a secret they wouldnt have took a picture and let the media get ahold of it they would have kept the pictures stashed away. Also the media is known to blow things out of proportion. In conclusion of my argument,we have tried and tried for many years to find something unatural or indifferent on another planet,eventually we would have stumbled upon something, but its just a landform,no alien activity. My question is after reading this argument couldn't this massive piece in history just turn out to be a rock?

In 1976 a strange humanlike face was found on Mars by NASA's Viking 1. A giant face almost two miles long was thought to be created by aliens. But NASA scientists thought differently. I believe that the face is a natural ladform as well as NASA. Becsause the NASA scientists proved it was a mesa and that they had no reason to cover up alien life. The face was found in one of the regions of Mars called Cydonia. Scientists were in shock at first, but they stated that it was a Martian mesa even though a face like structure was seen in the pictures. A couple days afterward the formation was unveiled for the public to see and they went insane over the images. The conspiracy theroies piled up as some stated that the pictures were perfect evidence of life on Mars. NASA's budget only wished that there was actual life on Mars but knew all to well there was no life on Mars. Only a handful of NASA scientists thought of this as an alien artifact, but getting more pictures of it was a top priority for NASA. On April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Mars Orbiter Camera team took a picture ten times sharper than the original photos. Thousands of web surfers were waiting for the image to appear on a JPL web site. There wasn't an alien monument. But all it did was reveal a natural landform. I was thrillled when I read this becuase it proved my hypothesis correct. But there were still some people who werent satisfied by the images. Some people claimed that there was a haze that kept the alien markings hidden. On April 8, 2001 on a cloudless summer day in Cydonia the Mars Global Surveyor got close enough for a second look. Using the cameras highest resolution it took a picture of the face. Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA’s Mars Exploration Program stated “As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size,” also he said “So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!” The face on Mars had captivated people's imagination for years. Wheather in a movie, books, magazines, or even in the gossip magazines. Aleins creating face just doesnt seem logical enough for NASA scientists or for me. Throughout this writing I've stated multiple facts and come to the conclusion that the face on Mars was just a natural landform, and not a alien made monument. I hope that you also will come to the same conclusion yourself.

Have you ever looked a photo of someone and wonder how they feel? Yes well now you can Thomas Huang form the neckman institute for Advance Science at the University of Amsterdam. Im all for this Facial Action Coding Sytem. It could show us how people long before use felt when getting there picture painted of picture taken. people could know how family member and friends felt before they past away. what if we could know how animals felt with the FACS? We dont know how people felt back then, we didn't know what they were going through, but with the FACS we could get a general idea of how they felt at that time in there life. Say you had a family member that passed away that you never met before but you want to know if they were a happy, sad, or mad person you could use the FACS to know so you dont have to hear it from someone else. Wouldnt it be cool to know what animals are feeling? If this FACS could show us how humans felt wouldnt you like to konw what your pets are feeling if your pet was sad and you didnt know,but you use the FACS you would know and then you and do something with your pet to keep the happy. Now you might be asking how does this FACS work well ehrn the computer constructs a 3-D computer modle of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. examples your frontalis pars lateralis muscles when you raise your eyebrows you are suprised, your orbicular oris (around your mouth) tightens your lips to show anger. these reasons i just listed are why i support the FACS!

In my opinion i feel like the use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is not valuable. I think its not a good idea of technology reading our emotions. Some people do have hard time showing their feelings but its either because they are hurt or scared. Others just show their feelings and emotions. Those are the kind of people that have been hurt but still move on with their lifes. Might take them a couple of days, weeks, months or maybe even years. This generation has changed there is a lot of technology now days. Us as humans we do what we like and work on what we like to do he express our emotions on what we do. On the other hand using technology is kind of a good idea for people that have trouble showing their feelings and emotions are the kind of people that would us technology. These kind of people that are scared to show their emotions would get this so they could get a little help to try to show their emotions. But for another reason the same people that have hard time showing their emotions are the one who would probably not use technology. For example using technology to show the Mone Lisa painting emotions would be 83 percent happy, 9 percent disguste, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. All of that doesnt sound right why not just express what you feel your emotions, Just be yourselfs. On the other hand another reason why people are scared to show their emotions and feelings is because the care about what other people think about them. That is one thing people should not care about do whatever makes you happy making good decisions. But happy is what everyone needs to be we only live once and why not spend it with the ones we love and that make us happy,

Citizens of the united states should participate in the "Seagoing Cowboys" program. First off they are sending animals such as horses, young cows, and mules to the coutries that were debistated from world war 2. Also they get the benfit of seeing Europe and China. Last they are serving for the orginazation of UNRRA. And this people is why you should join the "Seagoing Cowboys" program. To support the reason that they get the benifit of seeing Europe and China. They see most of Europe. They see most of China too. And they see what most ordinary people don't get to. This shows why people should join the "Seagoing Cowboys" program. And to support the reason that your serving for the orginazation of UNRRA. They are part of the UNRRA . The UNRRA stands for (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration). And so they are helping the debistated countries of Europe and China from world war 2. Last to support the reason that they are helping others in need of animals from the debistation of world war 2. They are giving people animals. They are also giving people their needs. And from those animals they are getting people the products they need. And I see why people do not want to join the program. maybe they want to stay with their families, or they get sea sick, or the fact that they just don't like animals. In conclusion this is why people need to join the "Seagoing Cowboys" program. Like I said, they are sending animals to the countries that were debistated from world war 2. They also get the benifet of seeing Europe and China. They are also serving for the orginazation of the UNRRA. Now I recomend you should join the "Seagoing Cowboys" program.

Driverless Cars are a major form of transportation that will hopefully arrive in the near future. These cars will be able to drive on their own on the roadways. So far, there are cars that are semi-autonomous, where the driver still needs to retain some control. Driverless cars will have a better impact on drivers in the future, such as an increase in advanced technology, an increase in safety, and the ability to assist drivers. One major aspect of the driverless cars would be the increased advanced technology. This technology will be able to mimic a human driver. Sensors will play a big role in this, and Google's Toyota Prius includes sensors on the left rear wheel, on the roof, radar sensors, an inertial motion sensor, a video camera on the rearview mirror, and a GPS receiver. Also, a spinning sensor on the roof of the car allows laser beams to create a 3-D model of the car's surroundings, which will enable the car to have more control. Another benefit of driverless cars would be the improvement in safety. Sensors will become more advanced and will be able to detect and avoid dangerous situations. The information from the sensors can allow the car to apply brakes to individual wheels and reduce the power from the engine. This will provide more control over the car and can even have a better response than a human can. As technology increases and becomes more advanced, sensors and computer software and hardware will provide more safety to drivers and passengers and also allow cars to handle tougher situations on their own. Along with the improved technology of driverless cars, these cars will be able to assist drivers on the roadways. Drivers don't have to completely go hands-off while driving, but the car can make driving easier and safer. So far, none of the developed cars is completely driverless, but they can perform most of the basic roadway tasks. Humans only need to take over in dangerous situations, such as an accident or while driving through work zones. The cars will be able to get the driver's attention when a problem arises, so that the driver doesn't necessarily have to pay attention to the road the whole time. They will only have to pay attention during certain situations that the car cannot handle. Driverless cars have not fully been developed yet, but manufacturers have been working to create fully-functioning driverless cars, and will hopefully be on the roadways sometime in the near future. There are many more benefits of these cars than there are limitations, and they will make driving much easier and safer for drivers and passengers in the future.

It would be a good idea to buy a driverless car. It's a great way to reduse accidents. When drivers get tired they can just let the car drive itself. There would be less pollution. We wouldn't use as much fuel which mean we'll waste less on fuel. If Google has made driverless cars since 2009, I see no reason to stop or not aloud to use driverless cars. If, we can use the technology to make better, smarter, and safer cars why not make them? General Motors created a concept car in the late 1950s, that could do special trest tracks. It all started with a concept car. We've become smarter as well and they'll find ways to creat a perfect driverless car before 2020. " Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?", "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?", Pargraph eight. People will still want a car that they can still control at anygiven moment. Drivers might get bored but at least they know they are save. The driver doesn't have to stare at the rode avery second. They can do other things while the driverless car is driving itself. If the driverless car needs the person to drive it will notifly the driver. As for the laws that focus on keeping drivers, and anyone in the car safe. I get those laws are made to keep people safe. Once it shown that driverless car are safe you should make it legal to drive them. Or should I say let them drive us.? " If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" Pargraph nine. It would be the both of their fault fault. The driver of buying and or maybe not paying attention. The manufacture for not make the car right. It all depends on what happened in the Accident. You can also make the person who buys the driverless car to sign an agreement. That says if a accident were to happen that it wouldn't be the manufacturers fault. He or She will take all responsiblity for what happens in the accident. All in all this is a very difficult argument. You can go eithre way.

There is many advantages to limiting car usage. There's less pollution emitted into the atmosphere, Safety is reassured, Time is saved, resources are conserved, People seem to relief stress being car-free. I read a passage called "In German Surburb, LIfe Goes On Without Cars," by Elisabeth Rosenthal. In the passage Elisabeth wrote about how Residents of Vauban, Germany have given up their cars. 70% of the families in Vauban do not own any cars, and 57% of the families there sold their cars to move here. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," Said Heidrun Walter as she was walked down the verdant streets. Vauban was completed in 2006, this movement of seperating suburban life from auto usage is called "smart planning." This movement can help a lot with the current efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes. This movement is happening all across Europe and the United States. Europe is responsible for 12% of greenhouse gases in Europe while it's up to 50% in the United States. Vauban is home to 5,500 people, it's basic precepts are being adopted from all around the world to try to reduce car usage, to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation. They're making stores a walk away on a main street, rather than in malls that are quite a distance. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting something new called "car reduce" communities. In the second passage I read called, "Paris bans driving due to smog," by Robert Duffer. In this passage Robert wrote about what happened in Paris; It enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of smog. Motorists with even numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or get a 22-euro fine, odd-numbered plated cars would have to do the same the next day. With this in effect, 4,000 drivers were fined that's atleast $124,000 American dollars; Congestion went down 60%. With this partial ban the smog cleared up enough on Monday for the ruling of French Party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday. In the third passage called, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota," by Andrew Selsky. In this passage Andrew wrote about a day in Bogota, Colombia and how this "Car-free" day impacted not only the City of Bogota but two other cities and probably another country. On the "Car-free" day in Colombia many Colombians hiked, biked skated or took public transportation. The goal of the whole event was to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog or get a $25 fine. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. This event can start a chain reaction and inspire other countries and nations to take a step to reduce all the pollution being emitted into the atmosphere. For the first time in the three year spand the event was held, two there cities joined Bogota. Cali and Valledupar joined in on the "Car-free" day in Bogota, Colombia. "These people are created a revolutionary change, and it's crossing borders," Said Enrique Riera Mayor of Asuncion, Paraguay. In the last passage called, "The End of Car Culture," by Elisabeth Rosenthal. In this passage Elisabeth wrote about how in America more Americans are buying less cars, driving less and less people are getting their Driver's Licenses. Driving decreased a 23% between 2001 and 2009. Experts say if this trend of buying, and driving less cars continue it'll be benefical implications for Crabon emissions and for the environment. The reduced usage and buyage of cars has a negative and a positive effect. The positive thing about it is that it's less pollution into the air, which means less Greenhouse gases, less traffic, and more safety; but it's negative effect is on the car industry their profits will plumet down quickly. As a result of this issue to the car industry Bill Ford laid out a business plan for a world with personal vehicle ownership is impractical; He's going to partner up with telecommunications industry to create cities where "Pedestrian bicycle, private cars, commerical and public transportation traffic are a connect network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions adn improve safety." In Conclusion, all of these factors like creating communities where there is no access to cars, banning driving for a couple days, having a car-free day, or just coming up with ideas of making self-sufficent cars can all lead to less emissions into the air and creating less smog; reassuring the safety of pedestrians; and conserving resources. These factors are all advantages of the idea of limiting car usage.  

Driveless cars are becoming a new idea and have been an experiment to try and make a perfect driveless car. Many different people have worked to come up with a flawless car that doesn't need a human behind the wheel. Although the idea is intriguing, i am not for driveless cars. There are many pros and cons of a drivelss car, however the cons out way the pros. Pros of a driveless car: less human errors, uses half the fuel of today's taxis, far more flexibility, and they're just cool. Less human errors would occur since they wouldn't even have to touch the wheel in the first place. In the article it discusses how less fuel would be used which ulimately helps save our budgets and environment. More flexibility would occur because wherever you desire to be, your car would be able to tke you and pick you up. Now, driveless cars are just plain cool. Who wouldn't want a car to make all the decisions while you just relax until you meeet your destination? Although there are pros, the cons are just to great. Cons of a driveless car: more accidents, not totally drivelss, disputes between manufactuerer and owner, expensive, too many chnages need to be made. Having a car that can drive for you is cool but the danger is just too high. The name of the car is very deceptive because to this day they aren't completely driveless, some still alert the driver when it is unable to drivve throug hcertain condidtions such as roadblocks or accidents. More accidents would occur because humans would rely on the automobile to drive itself when in fact the human must still be alert and awake. In paragraph 9 it discusses how there would be disputes between who would be responsible if the automobile system shut down. Should it be the manufacturer or the human in the car? Too man y laws would have to be instilled just because someone wants to make a new invention. Even with all these cons, the list could go on and on. Many people would love to have a driveless car, however they wouldn't want all the risk and cons that come with a driveless car. The invention would be cool and unique, however it just isn't practical. In my opinion driveless cars should stay in movies and not be out on the streets. They are dangerous and there would be far too many disputes brought on by owning on. Driveless cars would indeed fundamentally change the world like the article implies, the change just wouldn't be for good.

Landform or face? Is everyones first question when they hear about the figure that looks like a face that was found on Mars in 1976. NASA has studied this topic and has come to the conclusion that it is simply landforms. Now the question is what kind of land forms and how did they form? NASA has been studying this topic since 1976 to 2001. Team Nasa has been reshearching and studying picturers and has come to the conclusion that the face is a landform. We are highly certain it is a butte or Messa .A butte or Mesa is a lava dome. We compared the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho and it was the same hieght as the face on Mars. NASA has studied pictures that are so high tech that if there was small shacks on the planet you could see it! This reshearch has been fun for team NASA. As part of the NASA team I can tell you we did thorogh research to be absolutly certain it was not created by aliens. If this were created by aliens it would be a big step for NASA and the world. I hope this information was helpful to you

Today we will be talking about the story "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves." So sit back in your chair, and prepare to get lost your mind. Veiwer beware you might just learn somthing new. In this paragraph will be talking about the young man on his way to eroup Luke Bomberger. Some people say that it was dangerous but I say he did a heroic act by bring cattle and horses to war torn countries. Now we think why he did that for so long, it wasent money, fame, or even for himself. No he did that selfless act for those people who had nothing left after war war 2. If you ask thats why he did it to help those women, men, and children, of china germany italy and all sorts of places that were left in ruins. In this paragraph will be talking about Luke's claims. Such as he knew it was an opprotunity of a life time. That is supported by parts of the story were he may have to work but has fun in between his hard work. Like when in italy he visits such places like Crete or the Acropolis. There were also bad times like when he fell of that slipery ladder and broke some of his ribs in a storm and almost fell over board if it wasent for a small metal bar holding him in. For a second lets talk about the time he spent overseas. We look at the fun he had in his nine adventures. Such as when he first visted Greece. He went to the Acropolis, soon after he visited the Panama Canal. Those were just some of the places that he got to travel not includeing Venice or Crete or even China. In the end all you can say about Luke Bombriger is that he tried to help people. He was so selfless that even broken ribs couldnt stop him form doing whats right. There are only words that can discribe his charachter, selfless, kind harted. The number one thing you can call him this and simply this human.

Did you ever think that a computer can tell a humans emotions? The new Facial Action Coding System has been developed and it improves accuracy in perceiving the emotions of others. Dr. Huang and his colleague are trying to develop better ways for humans and computers to communicate. The Facial Action Coding System can tell your emotions, if you are sad, happy, suprised, angry, etc. On the Mona Lisa, Leonardos painting, they found out that she is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. So should the Facial Action Coding System be used in a classroom to read students emotional expressions? Yes, it should not be used in the classroom. It should be used in the classroom because it can help students learn better. In paragraph 6 it says, '' A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,'' Dr. Huang predicts. If you are confused or bored with something it will be harder for you to learn because you are not interested in the topic or how it is being taught. Also in paragraph 6 it says ''then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instrustor.'' So if you are bored with something, this computer could modify to make you more interested in the topic and it will help you pay more attention. Also, if you are confused about something the Facial Action Coding System can help you better understand stuff. Dr. Huang says in paragraph 6 that ''Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional connection.'' It is also a good way for humans and computers to communicate. Aslo, a student could be hiding an emotion, so if you have this system you could find out what their emotions are, and you can try to help them out. Should there be a Facial Action Coding System in every classroom? Will there be a Facial Action Coding System in every classroom that can tell students emotions? Is it a better way for humans and computers to communicate? You can tell many things from someones emotions. Who could have thought that making faces could reveal so much about the science of emotions.

Driving has been a necessary skill in society ever since Ford made the T Model. Since then the use of cars has only become more common within society. People use cars to go to and from work, as well as to travel on vacation and chauffer people around. While driving, people could be doing much more productive things, such as preparing for the arrival of a destination, or doing homework or fun activities. The legitamacy of the development of the driverless car is confirmed by the by the actions that people go through each day and the convenience that the car would provide, once laws are passed to make the car a reality. These days people's lives are filled with stressful tasks such as work, school, and extracurricular activities. A lot of peoples' time is used to drive when the time could be directed towards more productive things. The development of sensor technology (paragraph 5) has allowed for the possibility of a car that can almost drive itself. As companies such as Tesla, Audi, Mercedez Benz, and Nissan come closer to the objective of a car that can completely drive itself (paragraph 10), people are still presented with difficult tasks to fulfill other than driving. That is why the development of technology that can drive itself and take the work load off of the driver and free up time for the driver would be beneficial to society. The arguement that the people might have against the car could be laws that prohibit unattended vehicles on the road, and the conflict between driver or manufacturer if there is an accident. It is clearly stated in the passage (paragraph 9) that manufactureres belive that more states will allow limited use of semi-autonomous cars on roads as soon as the cars are proved more reliably safe. Many automakers are predicting that the problems ahead will be solved (paragraph 10). Also, the debate between the drivers fault, or the manufacturers fault (paragraph 9) can easily be settled with a few waivers, laws, and signed papers. The convenience and safety of the driverless car is becoming more and more legitimate as manufactureres continue to produce and develop capable cars. Laws against the driverless car are assumed by manufacturers to be less limiting and even solvable in time ahead. Because the work load that the car would take off of people and the convenience that the car would have, the benefits would outweigh the soon to be obsolete laws that are currently limiting the cars capablilites. Also the idea of a car that can basically drive itself is simply fun. Once the conflict between driver and manufacturer can be solved, most likely through laws and waivers, and the driver can make the personal choice to allow the car to drive itself, then people will be pleasantly surprised by the amount of free time they have.

i think that it could be used in class rooms so that way teachers and other students know what kind of mood the student is in so that way when they go to talk to someone they dont talk to somebody that is mad and the student that is mad say something rude to the person that is trying to be nice and just see how there day is going and i also think it can be usefule for students that are sad so that was school counseilers can talk to them and maybe see what is going on with the student maybe they are being bullied or maybe they just have some personal things going on at home so all around i just think that it can be usefule i mean im sure there would be times its not usefule because maybe people dont want to share there emotions with teachers but not only teachers but other students maybe they dont like people knowing there busness because i know a lot of people thats like that, that holds everything in and never talkes about there problems because they are scared or they dont want people to jude them witch i could understand that cause thats almost all anybody dose is juge and think that they are better or that they are perfict but there not but i do think that it can be usefulle.

According to the passage the use of using cras less it a much saver and healthier to the air this essay is to imfomr felloe citizens about the advantages og limiting car usage. As it is stated in the passage Residents of the  upscale communtiy in german hav e given up their cars "Street parking ,drive ways and home garages are geneally forbiddean in the experimental new district". Car ownership is allowed but there are only two places that you can park ,large garages at the end of the development(2) ,car owners buy the space for $40000 alone with a home(2). Becaus of this 70 percent of the families dont own cars while 57 percent do own cars (3)."When i had a car i was always tense ,i am much happier this way " said heidrun walter . Completed in 2006 is an example of a growing trend in Europe also the United states and elsewhere to separate suburban life from auto life use  , as a componet of a movement called "smart planning (4) ". Passengers cars are responsible for 12 percent of green house gas emissions in europe ,up to 50 percent in some car intensive areas in the united states .  Past few decades efforts have been made to make cities denser and better for walking ,planners are nikw taking this concept to the suburs ,home to 5500 residents within a rectangular square mile .In this new appocah stores will be placed in a walk way  on the main streest rather then in malls alone some distant high ways . "ALL of our developement since world war 2 have been centered on the car ,and that will have to change " (7) said david goldberg . Paris enforced a partical ban unpon driving to clear the glabal city ,almost 4,000 drivers were fined according to Reuters  27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction fine .Because of that congestion was down 60 percent in the captail of france ,the smog rivaled beijing ,china which is known as one of the most polluted citesbin the world. Diseal fuel was blamed ,diseal makes up 67 percent of vehicles in france while 53.3 percent are diseal engines in the western europe. The smog was cleared enough on monday for french party to recined the ban for odd numbers plates on tuesday. In colombia a program was set ,leaving the streets of the capital city devoid of traffic jams ". Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution " , day without cars is an improvenment campagin that begun in the mid 1990's .Parks ,sports centers bloomed throughout the city ,uneven pitted sidewalks hace been replaced and so on .Recent studies suggest that americans are buyiinh fewer cars etc ..which left reserches poundering 'Has americs passed peak driving"? But americans love affair with its vehicles seemse to be cooling adjusted for population growth number of miles driven peaked in 2005 than droopend after that .Many meaures  the decrease in driving preced the downturn which is persisitinbg now that recover is under way . if this pattern persists it will be benefical impliactiins for carbon emissions and environment. With all these changes people who stopped car commutin as a result of the recession may find less reason to resume the habit

Car usage is one of the biggest reasons that as to why there is so much air pollution in the world. Buying more will just make the problem grow. This is why we should limit the use of cars and start thinking of other ways to get around such as walking or riding a bike. One of the reasons that we should limit car usage is because, it's one of the main causes that the Earth is so unhealthy. Using cars cause more and more greenhouse gas emissions. If we are able to reach a community with very little car use then those people without a car will not only be saving money, but also preventing greenhouse gas emission. Many people will also be able to get more excercise because they won't be driving everywhere, but they will be walking or bicycling. Many people also stress out due to not having enough money to finish paying for a car, or to fill their car up with gas. Most of those problems will go away if they just limit or stop their car usage. In Bogota, Colombia, for the third straight year, cars have been banned, and only taxis and buses have been allowed on the streets. Many people are enthusiastic on participating and wouldn't even let rain stop them from arriving at their destination. he goal was to reduce smog and so far, they have been reaching their goal. Another city that has recently had a car free days has been Paris, France. Paris enforced a partial driving ban due to days of near-record pollution. the amount of smog Paris had was enough to rival that of Beijing's which is known as the most polluted city in the world. After a couple of days, the smog cleared enough for cars to be allowed to be used again. Those are only some of the few reasons as to why car usage should be very limited, many people don't realize it, but if we don't do something about the amount of air pollution that we have, it may be too late to save the planet Earth.

Why do you believe the face was created by aliens? When looking at this image, you can think about that at first but if you believe it immediately, then there is something wrong about that. I will explain to you why the face was not created by aliens though i will also explain why someone may believe that. The face is an image we found in 2001 that was taken by our Viking 1 spacecraft that was circling the Mars. The face is an area of land on Mars that has the illusion of a face. The illusion of the face comes from the shadows making the land look like it has a nose, eyes, and a mouth that resembles a human face. It was a surprise for most people here at NASA but we didn't believe it was alien works immediately because we didn't have any real evidence of it. It just so happened to be a patch of land that looked like a face. We couldn't say it was made by aliens because we needed proof of that and we haven't studied Mars' enough to prove that aliens made the face. We know Mars is similar to Earth but it's still a different planet in our solar system. Although we hoped it might've been an alien civilization, we studied the face more and it was simply a landform similar to a mesa or butte of our world. Even though we know it was just a landform, there are reasons we could see people saying it might've been made by aliens. We know Mars is able to sustain life because of it's conditions and there has been few deposits of water found there, but we have never found an actual living species on the planet itself. We as humans still don't know if aliens live on Mars or if aliens from other worlds exist at all. Many people believe there are aliens from other planets and some don't really care about the subject at all but it is possible that there's life on other planets. Because we haven't figured out if Mars has life, people believe the strange and convinient findings on Mars (like the face) are works of alien beings. Although we have confirmed the face was not a work of aliens, we still don't know if aliens exist. We can conclude that the face is not the work of aliens but there just might be unearthly beings on our neighboring planet, Mars. Before we can confirm there are alien beings on Mars, we would need evidence to explain they do exist at all. But we can conclude, the face is not made by aliens.

If you ask me you've got to be out of your right mind if you let a car drive you . You never know what could happen while your letting this car take control . Very resently there have been multiple accidents occurring where a human has gone to sleep on the road while there '' smart car '' was in control and that was not very smart if you ask me . First of all , I would never put my trust into a car all kinds of malfunctions could occur . In paragraph 9 it states in most states it is iilegal even to test computerdriven cars . Also as stated in paragraph 9 '' If the technology fails and someone is injured , who is at fault - the driver ot the manufacture . '' That statement there should not even have to be brung up . There's a red flag already . Unless , I know that smart cars are 100 % safe , there aren't any red flags , and it has been tested and proved to be safe you will never catch me inside of one . Just think about it , lets say you and your family go on a trip that is a 24 hour long drive and you decide instead of going to a rest stop or getting a hotel you'll just take a nap inside of the car and let the smart car take control . And as you come upon roadwork the car can't read the road signs ; that would be an accident right there . This car isn't all that smart . I feel as if no one should be allowed to drive a smart car just yet especially since there are problems still occurring . As I've already stated very resently there have been multiple accidents occurring where a human has gone to sleep on the road while allowing a car to take control . And guess what occurred ? ACCIDENTS . Do to the fact this car does not take on much of the duties humans are able to take on . As stated in paragraph 10 '' Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved .'' For now in my opinion these smart cars are not safe enough to drive ; I give it about 4 -5 years then maybe automakers will have it all figured out . But until then I am ANTI - SMART CAR .

I think that the Facial Action Coding System is a good idea for the studetns in the classroom. It may be good for many different other things, for example if someone needs help or in danger as in they could be crying showing that they are scared. But I feel they should take it a little more exstreme for things like could also have audio and could really help with peoples lives. Not even the bad emotions if you are happy or exicted it can sense that and something good could happen. One reason I believe this would work because there is so much danger and anything can happen and we could use extra protection. But I also feel that it could be more to it then just looking for emotions. Even if they are good emotions there should be something to say or something should light up when the senseor feels that you are happy. They should test it out and see how it goes and turns out for some people and if things go good the they should move it to the next step and add audio and see how much it makes a impact on peoples lifes. Another reason I feel that it might work is because sensing peoples emotions is great. Peoples emotions shows alot it can say so much about their personality or how they feel about life, it could even gives you signs about that person and could get people aware so they can put thst person in a safe place if they need to. There should also be bounderies because most people arn't gonna want a computer screen or phone screen watching them, their emotions or even listening to them. But to even fix that you could always have were you could turn the senseor on an off just so people could feel more surcure. Overall my thought about the Facial Action Coding System is great. You can take it so far and you can keep it how it is. Even if graphing shows that people don't like it I still think it is a good idea for me thinking saftey wise. Thats just the people life and you can also take it very far with paintings. I think this idea is a million dollar hit and it should be tested out.

My position on driverless cars is that I'm against with the driverless cars, because in paragraph 9 it said that it's waiting on the law. It talks about that most laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, but what "if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault—the driver or the manufacturer?" It going to take forever to figure out to se who fault it is, because 1 is going to be driver he didn't react fast enough and didn't try to stop it or just becasue is the owner's car is going to be the owner fault in paragrpah 7 said that manufacturers are considering putting cameras to watch drivers to remaining focused on the road, but there going to be some people that are going to agruement about privary with the camera in the car. Manufacturer is going to be there fault for not checking the technology to see if they will work. That something tht the supreme court or court doesn't what to go through. It sounds like a good idea to help the environment, would you less fossil fuel but there are still risk that can happen with the technology. The introduction of this article about Driverless Cars Are Coming talks about how if you can see the future where no one buys cars. Well the Google cofounder Sergey Brin is trying to do see the future with public transportation system that are driveless. Sensing the World in the late 1950s General Motors created a car that could run on a special test track, but how is it going to help in the open road with an electrical cable that sent radio signals to a receiver on the front end of the car on each highway that the only why that car would be able to run. In the the smart road systems it worked but they need a lot of upgrades to existing roads, something that is to much to pay for. Without the smart road there is no driverless car on the road. Driving or Assisting is talks about the antilock brakes and driver assistance still seem a long way from the dream calling a cab that is driverless, but in the article Driverless Cars are coming to that 2013 BMW said that had devloped a system called the Traffic Jam Assistant that it help the car be handle driving the right speed up to 25 miles per hour. It the system makes the drive keeps its hand on the steering wheel. On the driverless car they can do is they can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but they have not meet the human skills, like driving through work zones and around accidents.

Sir I belive that u are wrong when u say that the mesa was made by extra terestrials. I believe this to be tru because, mesas are a common land mass in tharea that the "face" was found, There is a sharper image of the mesa that shows that it was not made aliens. In paragraph two of this article line two states " Scientist figured it was just another martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian." other evidence in this article that backs my state ment ar as follows. " Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." In paragraph 6 of the article line 2 state "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform." Line 3 states "There was no alien monument after all." Hence there is no way that the mesa could had been made ny aliens. The evidence is every where in the articles about it and there is even more in the article i showed you. So again there is no way in this scientific feild that would support your theory that the mesa was made by aliens. But I do see where you might have thought that on first glance.

"What's that thing on the moon dad?" "That is a land form, it's not on the moon but on Mars a planet far away from us." The landform on mars in natural, even if it looks like a face. You can see things closeer up in a digital image, there are many equivilent landforms on Earth that are natural, and lots of theories are exagerated. The landform on Mars is a mesa, and there are many like it on Earth. As the text states, "It remids me most of Middle Buttein the Snake River Plain of Idaho..." Just because something that is here and it's known it is natural doesn't mean that on another planet it was made by or is extra terrestial. Theories about the mesa on Mars being from other lifeforms was exagerated. As the text says, " The Face on Mars has become a pop icon. It has starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, rado talk shows- even haunted grocery stores for 25 years!" Over time the face on Mars probably got twisted, just like a game of telephone. The truth probably got mushed with Sci-Fi. A digital image in taken in 2001 showed nothing but rocks no tools, and the picture was very shap and discerning. The text states, ""Malin's team captured an extrodinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." Each pixel in the photo covered 1.56 meters insteaf of 43 meters per pixel. As a rule of thumb you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size." This means that if there were tools, construction equipment, or anything from "extra terrestrials" that they would be visible in the picture. There was nothing there but landforms and rocks. In 1998 the best picture taken was when Mars was foggy and skeptics and theorists said that markings could be hidden. But in 2001 a new picture was taken and it showed that the landform only had the markings the rest of the planet. The red dust and rocks. The landform on mars in natural, even if it looks like a face. You can see things closeer up in a digital image, there are many equivilent landforms on Earth that are natural, and lots of theories on the face are exagerated. Before you speculate, have your facts straight.

Have you ever wondered what other people might be feeling? Well the aruthor in the store is introducing us to this new technology called The Facial Action Coding System (FACS). This Technology is suppose to detect anyones emotions at that time by using a 3-D model of a face and detects it by the 44 major muscles must move like human muscles. I believe this could be a good use for in the future for students in school who deals with depression and anxiety and doesn't show it. Some students probably wont't like the idea of a computer telling how you're really feeling because like some they probably doesn't like to show any emotions but this technology could help a lot of students out dealing with their emotions. It would be just like us telling a friend how are they feelings just like in the article its says For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feelin simply by the look on her face". We all need just a reminder to smile every once and a while just like in the article it also says helps the muscles and helps preduce them. Overall, i think this technology could be very usefull not only to just express feelings but also for students, adults, anyone who deals with their emotions to helps them. Make them feel happy and be able to show their emotions intead of keeping it inside of them.

In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author states that exploring Venus would be an immense challenge to overcome due to all of the extremely harsh conditions. Venus, also known as the "Evening Star," is an extremely dangerous planet to explore. Even though scientists are aware of these difficult factors, people like the author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" still think that being informed about this bright point of light is worth it. According to astronomers, Venus may have at one point been the planet with the most Earth-like features. Venus is said to now have a "surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." These characteristics are one of the reasons as to why the author states that Venus is a pursuit worth risking many things for. Another reason is because in paragraph 4, the author states "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit." Although these are all fair reasons to want to visit Venus once again, astronomers have to keep in mind all of the negative characteristics that will set their exploration behind. All astronomers and explorers are well aware of all of the challenging conditions such as the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere and the atmospheric pressure being 90 times greater in Venus than the pressure in Earth. These are not the only challenging conditions; another dangerous feature is that temperatures average over 800 degrees Farenheit in Venus's surface. Consequently, the author states in paragraph six that there are now many scienstist searching for technology that will be able to stand the harsh conditions in Venus: "Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." In the previous paragraph, the author informs the readers about an idea that NASA has thought of. The plan for sending people to study Venus would not give the necessary information to be properly informed of this volatile planet. All of these obstacles are not enough to calm human's desire of knowledge about unearthly topics. In paragraph eight, the author says that all of the challenges are not enough to mellow down our curiosity enough to quit studying Venus. In conclusion, the claim about Venus being a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents that the author of "The Challenges of Exploring Venus" states is well supported by facts and perfectly thought out ideas. Although Venus is an extremely dangerous planet packed with many reasons as to why exploration is currently held back, NASA is still looking for ways to be able to gain more valuable insight about the Evening Star. Just like the author said, learning and travelling should not be limited by doubts, and scientists will not let doubts and fears stop them.

I believe that dirverless cars should continue developing and growing. Driverless cars in my opinion are the future of driving, and there is nothing that anyone can do to change it. With everything that we have in the world today at somepoint someone thought it was a stuipd idea and it was impossible. For example Steve Jobs created Apple out of a garage and then was kicked out of his own company. When he came back he worked even harder to prove everyone wrong, and he did. He created the first smart device and it changed the world. The self driving cars are the new tomorrow and big dreamers will make it a reality, all we can do is be ready. Google is the first company to sucessfully make a self driving car, that works on real roads. Google took a Prius and fitted it with sensors, cameras, high tech GPS, and motion sensors. Out of all the high tech gadgets that Google's car has the most impressive is the rotationg sensor on the roof. It creates a 3-D display of the cars surrounding so that car can react more precisly to the changing road conditions, and act more like a real driver. Even with all of these gadgets some people still think that self driving cars are a danger to people on the roads. That is where they are wrong, "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash". Most people in their life dont drive half a million miles, and if they did they would at least get into one fender bender. I am not saying that these cars are perfect machines that can just go out on the roads today, there are still so many things that have to be done before they are ready, but they are closer than ever. Although they are called driverless cars, they are not completely driverless. Someone need to be in the car in case the car comes upon a situation that requires a human touch, such as construction zones or complicated traffic jams. Now you might be thinking just sitting in that car while it drove me around would get boring but, BMW is talking about fitting a heads up entertainment display that the driver could use until they needed to take the wheel. This would keep you accupied as the car drove, it just has to be leagal. The main problem for self driving cars is the Law. It is illegal for self driving cars to even be tested in most states. As self driving cars become more advanced and prevelent, States will most likely start changing their laws. New laws will also have to be put into place as safety regulations. The laws will have to be able to regualte what can be used in the cars and how they are used. One big issue is if there is an accident most drivers will try and sue the manufactures for faulty equipment, but are the manufactures really at fault. Self driving cars are becoming more and more of a reality every day, and that scares some people. They just have to trust that the proper safety precautions will be taken to prevent any injurines. Most companies pedict that their self driving cars will be street ready by 2020, but will we be ready for them.

Imagine having a bad day, and no one knows whats wrong with you or why you are mad, you friends and family are trying to look at you and figure out whether your mad, frustrated or worse, but because you've been hiding your emotions all day they can't seem to realize why. The day is over and they finally realize that you are mad based on your facial expressions and how you've been acting lately, but had they been using the Facial Action Coding System they would've known before hand. I believe that the Facial Action Coding System is a brillant idea and should be used for everyday purposes. Not only can it read and detect your emotions, but it can also give you an result of how your feeling for any occasinal day even if your hiding your emotions. "Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements-in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa." This detail shows how efficient this can be for many people and students as well. To be aware of the feelings that different people have everyday, the Facial Action Coding System will have to do accurate calculations to determine whether a person is having a bad day or not. Some of these calculations can determine and even find new information about a person as well. "By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions (as in da Vinci's masterpiece). Each expression is compared against a neutral face (showing no emotion)." This detail shows that even though the computing sysytem might know the person's feelings it still needs to perfrom calculations to prove these results. Without the Facial Action Coding System we as people could never excalty calculate and tell the exact mood or feeling a person could be having everyday. These computing systems are the best resources we have to identify the mixed emotions that a person could or may have. These computers could be great tools for teachers to use in the classroom. Such as a student having a bad day, using these computers can help a teacher identify whether to help a student or not based on different expressions a student is having. "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face. Of course, most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, etc." Last but not least I truly believe that Facial Action Coding System is valuable in many ways, and can help solve, and face any problems that people could be having everyday, thanks to the Facial Action Coding System.

I think that it was a real face, why you ask? Because that could of been a life form, and that could of been were it fell down. Where else would a face in the moon sand be like that for no reason. Like conol sanders always says its finger lickin good. Thats why theres a face there in the moon. Ancient tribes could of lived there before we even discovered the moon orbiting around the planet earth in the first place. There are many theroys about the moon to be exspected. I think that any reason could be leggitimint when kernal sanders made KFC he didnt suspect a thing he just made a ton of chicken with no reason to stop and think. Thats just like a way of discribing any way is possible when you were not alive long ago. Because you didnt have the technology to even try, to see if there were anyone on the moon in the first place. Think of it as saying mabe the didnt even breath the oxygen they could just breathe in space. It seems imposible i know but mabe to the kind of life on the moon didnt need food water or air. I think that every type of answer can be juged by the way it sounds but there many ways it could happen. like mabe before it was the moon it was a planet to with life on it just like earth with water, food, and resources to stay alive a a point in time long ago. But when it smashed into earth all of its compounits swichted at impact. Burning every living thing on the moon and making things for the earth. My reason is that god made life but when he did he made life on the moon to but eventually it died out before our time and leaving a souless moon for the earth to smash into it 2.3 billion years ago. Creating earth and life, humanity, and the world. When the found the face in the moon, they were just then finding out that the moon may have contained life long ago. Although it might not of happened how I explained, there might of been another way of life its self on the moon. I think it could of been a rational way, but we will never know untill the end of time. As if there was life created on the earth just the same way a little time ago. When the face showed up it was unbelible.

There's a new trend that has been developing for years now, and soon will be in full throttle affect. The mass amount of polution being produced world-wide over the years has been at terrifying levels, up until the last five to ten years. Although not the first cause of the polution, gases emitted from transportation is the second largest contributer to this "green house gas" issue going on, according to source 4. An idea to hinder this growing issue and potentially put the polution levels at a decline is the effort to limit personal car usage. By doing this, we inhabitants of the world are able to help clear the air, reduce congestion on the streets, and live a simpler, more cost efficient lifestyle. Polution, as we know, is an ongoing trend that is proving lethal to our environment. Factories and power plants are the number one cause of polution in the world. This is almost inevitable, since we have yet to develop a way to produce in mass amounts in a clean way. However, what we can have a part in is limiting the personal car usage to promote cleaner air. Public transportation, carpooling, and hybrid/electric cars have been seen as the alternative to owning personal cars. Those options are also seen as the solution, considering their contribution to the act since "the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak [of 2005]" (source 4). Reducing the amout of miles driven links to the amout of dangerous gases emitted into the air, therefor "having cleaner air." Rush hour traffic is obnoxious and is the least fun part of driving. Encouraging people to drive less and either walk, bike, or use public transportation will help end the long waits sitting bumper-to-bumper on the roads. In France, a study was done where fines were placed on people who drove by themselves or with only one passenger (excluding hybrids and "plug in" cars). According to the source, "congestion was down 60 percent." Just a week of not driving with personal (gasoline or diesel) cars proved to be extremely beneficial in clearing out the streets, making for easier courses to work. The concept is truly simple. We use less cars, there's less people on the street, and you can get to and fro much faster and without hassle. Reducing the number of cars on the street is also a goodway to inspire motor companies to be inventive. Losing business will ultimately result in extermination of the business, unless the corporation is able to come up with new products to satisfy the consumer. Mitsubishi is a automotive company that also makes air conditioners. According to source 4, Ford and Mercedes are "rebranding" themselves to comply with the new trend. Almost everyone wants to live a clean, healthy and simple lifestyle and participation in limiting the number of cars driven daily is a very easy way to do so. Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, said,"When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" (source 1). This refers to the successful suburban trial in Vauban, Germany to no longer own cars. Parking on the street, personal garages, and driveways in general are seen as taboo in the living district near France and Switzerland's border (source 1). Very few people own cars, let alone drive them. Not only does lowering the usage of cars help the environment and make the journey to wherever you're going much less complicated, it also initiates the restoration of things considered not as important such as sidewalks, parks, and public transport systems. The more people using the utilities, the more cities will fund them and make the experience more enjoyable. In Bogata, the "day without cars" campaign has led to 118 miles of bycle paths being constructed (source 3). The chain of events will lead to more and more people utilizing their bikes and feet to get around, instead of cars. Driving used to be considered the most popular way to get around town from point A to point B and back. But now, with a push to limit personal car usage, a positive switch is happening to where more and more people are no longer relying on their vehicles to move about-instead bikes, subways and buses, and even just our own two feet are our means of transportation. This "smart planning" reduces green house gases along with traffic congestion, and also promotes a simpler, healthier lifestyle.                                        

Anyone whould love to vist Venus, but there is some risks when it comes to it. For an example Venus is the second planet from our sun, Venus has the most highest temperature than any other planet, and NASA has an idea for sending humans to study Venus. There's so many things that can put someone in danger or at risk. First, Venus is the second plant away from Earth. Venus can have alot of intresting things, people could probably live there, but no one has thought about the risks about being there. In the text it says "Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth..." It is more dificult to study Venus knowing how close it is to us. It is more challenging to examine since it's way closer than any other planet. Second, Venus has the most hightest temperatue than any other planet. In the text it says "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system even though Mercury is closer to our sun" Out of any planet that isn't to close to the sun or Earth had to be the hottest. Would humans be ready if the really going to get sent to Venus be able to go? knowing how hot the temperature is. A humans temperature is 98 degress Fehrenheit. The conditions there are so extreme than humans on Earth like high pressure and heat. The weather is so different and since it is very hot then it is more likely to present "erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes" and more things like that. Third, NASA has an idea of sending humans to study Venus. How would you react if someone said "Hey, you're going to Venus" like woah. The first that should pop in your head should be to research because you can't just go without knowing what's really going on out there. NASA think that they should send humans out there to study Venus, if it is safe for humans to go. In the text it says "Some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface." There is many ways NASA wants to study Venus by forms of photography and videography, but they cant because they also cannot sample rock, gas from a distance. Someone would really need to get a close up and that where the risks come and no one knows that could happen. Finally, if someone really wants to study Venus they will need to do a lot of research because this will be a hard mission to complete if they really to want to. Someone who is very brave should go because Venus is a very dangours place to actually study knowing the cons and pros.

I think the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. It could be very useful for teachers when they are teaching a new lesson. It can also be helpful by using it see what emotions other people are actually showing. Here I will tell you why this technology is valuable to classrooms and maybe more. Firstly, it can be helpful for teachers in the classroom. The technology can identify what emotions the teacher's students are feeling about the lesson. I know this because the article states,' "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts'. This can help students who are either, too afraid to ask for help or those who are, too shy. This technology can help the teacher notice that the lesson is either, too hard or too confusing for their students. This leads to making the lesson easier to understand for those confused students. I know this by the article stating," Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Secondly, this can be used to identify other people's emotions. Sometimes we question if politicians or celebrities are actually sincere and truthful about the expression they are showing on camera. Well, this technology can help us out. I know this by the article stating," They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one." Faces can't lie. According to the article it states," To an expert, faces don't lie.." It also states," ... these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" polictician or celebrity isn't being truthful." Which this can help us with voting for politics. In conclusion, I think this technolgy to read students' emotional expressions is very vauble in a classroom. It can help teachers understand and clear things out for the students. It can also help some students out when they are either confused about the lesson or shy and afraid about asking for help. It can be valuable in politics, too. Like, indicating whether the expressions they show us is truthful or not. This is how I think this technology to read emotional expressions is very valuable whether its in a classroom or not.

Hello,my name is Luke Bomberger and i'm going to talk about the Seagoing Cowboys program. First i'm going to say how fantastic it is being a Seagoing Cowboy. Even though you go on a ship that takes one month to two months it worth the wait getting to the designated area. You can think how many people or animals lives your saving by just becoming a Seagoing Cowboy. Imagine going places you never imagined going, like Greece, China. You can also go see places like a excaved castle in Crete even the Panam Canel Even if the animals have to be fed and watered two to three times a day it's still worth it. You will be tired from pulling bales of hay and bags of oats even stalls had to be clean. There is good things about being a Seagoing Cowboy like when your on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. We had tabel tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games also helped pass the time. I hoped you liked what i said about being a Seagoing Cowboy because i loved being at one. I hope you sign up and become one to, thank you.

Do you think the Face on Mars is a natural landform or it was created by aliens? I am almost completely positive that the Face on Mars is a natural landform. There are scientifically proven facts that the Face is a natural landform. The Face was first spotted and taken a picture of by NASA's spacecraft Viking 1 in 1976. Ever since then people have been curious to find out more and more about this discovery. It is proven that the Face is a mesa. The Face only looks like a face because shadows creates the appearance of facial features. The Face is proven by NASA that it is only a mesa. The article states "Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia..." This shows how there are other mesas and they are known for being in the same area as the Face. This is not the only example that the Face is a natural landform, the Face doesnt even have actual feautures of a human face. There is also proof that the Face does not have the structure of a human face. The article states NASA captioned a image of the Face stating "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose,and mouth." This proves that shadows make the appearance of eyes, a nose, and a mouth, the Face does not have the structure of these facial features. NASA has proved and showed many reasons of why the Face was not created by aliens. The Face was not created by aliens and NASA has proved it. The Face has shadows that makes it appeare like it has an actual facial structure. The face is just another mesa that is common is its area. I believe people should except the fact and believe the Face was not created by aliens.

Can computers really tell your emotions? Dr.huang is the facial expression emotion observer. Caculating your emotions is like caculating in math.So computers might do this but you can code it to make it work. It all begins when a computer contructs a 3-D computer model of the face. And all 44 of the major muscles in the face must move. Dr,Huang relies on the work of psychologist. Like Dr,Paul eckman creator of FACS (facial action coding system). This is what helped find the emotions of the mona lisa. Eckman has a classified six basic emotions -happy,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,and sadness. Then associated each with characteristics movements of the facial muscles. Also using video imagery the new emotions-recognition software tracks these facial movements in a real face or in the painted face of mona lisa. Your home PC cant handle the complex algorithmus used to decode mona lisa smile. But there are simple instructions to encode different emotions. The muscles you are encoding are called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crows feet around your eyes. If you have a false smile your mouth is stretched side ways. Most likely an actor will do alot of these for a play or movie. But your computor can do it and there is many more things to come in the future.

I think that using this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in their classroom is valuable. It is valuable becuase it can show when a student is losing interest or becoming bored or even if they are confused. it would be able to show the pace the student is learning and how comfortable they are with it. Teachers should be able to use the Facial Action Coding System becuase it can help the students stay more focused instead of just sitting there and letting the information go into one ear and out the other. It can help the teachers be able to keep students on task. Another reason why this technology might be a good idea for teachers in their classrooms is it can help showing when a student might not get the material or they might be confused and not understand what they are working on. With the help of the Facial Action Coding System, it can help the student get more help from teachers and their grades might even go up because it is showing the teachers how they are truly feeling in that class. The last reason why I agree with having the Facial Action Coding System is valuable is because it can show when the students are ready ti move onto the next thing because they are comfortable enough with the material. It shows the students are ready for the next thing. It could also help tell if the class is too easy and the student might need an advanced class or the things they are learning are too challenging for them. This Facial Action Coding System is valuable in many ways. It may not be the most important thing to have in the classroom but it will help with putting the students with what they are ready and comfortable enough with to learn.

With the years, we have changing many things in our society. Since technology, by making new electronic devices, to things in our government, by making new laws and new things to help people in all the country. But, does that mean that we have to change the Electoral College to election by popular vote for the presindet of the United States? In my point of view, the Electoral College is a traditional way to vote the President by the Congress and by qualified citizens that our founding fathers established in our Constitution. And there are many evidence to support that keeping the Electoral College is beneficial to our country. According to the text "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner, A dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College is possible, and it happened in 2000, but it's less likely than a dispute over the popular vote. For example, in 2012, Obama received 61.7% of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3% of Romney. Almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landsalide electoral vote vistory in that satate. This demostrates, how people accept the fact that they are voting the electors and then for the President and Vice president. This help people by making easily the hour of vote for a candidate. However, as we can se in the texts above, not everybody things like this. For example, in the text "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer, the author says that according to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly after Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency, over 60% of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now. But, each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee, it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. Yet that has happened very rarely. (Posner, paragraph #16). Another evidence from the text "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised mothod of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner,  is when he says "The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal" (Posner, paragraph #19). That means that No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. So a solid regional favorite has no incentive to campaign heavely in those states, for he gains no electoral votes by increasing huis plurality in states that he knows he will win. "The residents of the other regions are likely to feel disenfranchised..." That highlights how the Electoral College is trying to helping people vote their candidates and feel safe and comfortables with them. To conclude, despite the fact many people say that the Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism and a non-democratic method of selecting  a president, the Electoral College is a traditional way to vote the President by the Congress and by qualified citizens that our founding fathers established in our Constitution that helps our community to help people with thir desicions and make our life more comfortable and easy.

In this article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author described how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding Systems enables computers to identify human emotions. This technology could be used to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom, but should it be used in classrooms? One reason why it should is very simple. This technology ,as stated by Dr. Huang in paragraph 6, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." This would eliminate the struggle of feedback for a teacher. Teachers do not know exactly how a student feels about the lesson because, "most human communication is nonverbal." The computers would be able to tell the teacher whether or not the students are understanding the lesson. Another reason why it would be valuable for these computers in classes is that teachers would be able to eliminate the struggle of having to believe students, even though "humans perform this same impressive calculation every day." But the reason it is so hard for the teacher is that," most of us would have touble describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, etc." An example of this would be a student said that they had not been able to do their homework because someone in their family died. Without the computer, the teacher has to make a decision whether or not to let them turn it in late which can be hard and is just a small example. With this technology teachers would be able to tell whether they are lying or not. The reason the student could get away with it, if this technology was not being used, would be that they could sound serious about it and they could have a serious look on their face because "most human communication is nonverbal." These computers could tell if that person is actually lying by calculating "muscle clues." The last reason is about safety of students and faculty of schools. If classrooms were to have this technology I'm sure people with depression and other serious issues would be able to get the help they need. The computers would be able to tell "the percentage" if someone is severely sad or very angry. This would ensure that people that work or study in schools are so much safer than without the technology. However, this technology is still slightly new and probably expensive. Schools may not have enough money to purchase one or more of these computers. Even though it seems to work very well it still can be fooled. The reason for this is that," according to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotions, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but may even help produce them." Also the technology only has "six basic emotions," which may not be enough. In conclusion, this technology would be very valuable to schools and classrooms even if there are some set-backs. Even though it may be expensive now maybe one day all schools could use this technology. This technology would save lifes and minds of students and teachers.

Autonomous cars are making a statement; who wouldn't want to benefit from a self-driving car? Autonomous cars can really change the way of everyday transportation; however, this can also be a bad thing. Changing a part of our daily lives could really be a hassle, but a self-driving car could help in so many different ways. Safety is a key issue here, but autonomous cars are built with safety as the first thing in mind. Techonology and engineering are key to these cars, and we've reached a point in time where almost anything is possible. I am for the development of autonomous cars. However, I believe they should still require human skills to be driven. Technology fails at times, so that's why I am more for semi-autonomous cars. Humans are capable of so much intelligence, and with modern day technology advancing, semi-autonomous cars can really assist us in our day to day lives. If autonomous cars are a success, there should be restrictions regarding our safety and the safety of others. Safety is a major concern with cars. With normal cars, there have been times where a car company has had to recall certain vehicles with unnoticed, long-term issues. With autonomous cars, car crashes are nonexistent. According to the article, "Their [Google's] cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash..." Car crashes are one of the most awful experiences a person could go through. They are life threatening and killer. Car crashes could leave a person in fear of driving or simply sitting in a car. Not one person should have to go through that. It's not easy going through one; with car crashes being minimalized to nothing with autonomous cars, the roads are safer for everyone. Since technology is improving, autonomous cars are looking better than ever. The technology included in a driverless car is very possible; however, it has not yet happened. Semi-autonomous cars have been a success - they allow easier driving with just as much awareness. Semi-autonomous and autonomous cars have the ability to save thousands of lives every year, maybe millions. Cars are built for a person's safety on the road - autonomous cars are no different. In conclusion, I am for autonomous cars. Without a doubt, I trust the idea of semi-autonomous cars more than autonomous cars, however. There are pros and cons to an autonomous car, but an enormous pro of autonomous cars includes the major concern of safety. According to the article, not one crash has happened with independently driving cars. Car crashes are life threatening, and not easy to go through. This is why I am for autonomous cars. More lives can be saved everyday, every month, every year.

I think they should develop the driverless cars, because it would be something new and most likely be safer then normal driving. People say the car could malfunction or go out of control but if they think that then why are there self drive airplanes. (auto pilot). Planes would make a even bigger accident if it were to malfunction. So I think driverless cars should have a chance. If the something happens to the car then it is the drivers fault, because he/she should have been paying attention and making sure nothing is going wrong. It wouldn't be the manufacturers fault because they just develop it and make sure everything is in order, they don't have control over once a customer buys a uses one. In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant." The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." If the driver is not co-operating with the driverless car then an accident or something worse could happen, and would be the drivers fault. In passage 7, it says "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing up into an object." If failed to do so an accident will accur on be blamed on the driver for not paying attention. In conclusion, the driverless car should be developed. If an accident accurs then it would be the driver's fault unless something goes wrong in the car itself.

Venus or also called the evening star is one of the brightest of light in the night, Venus is the second planet from our sun, is simple to see safety in a point of the earth, but has proved a bigger challenge to examine more closely but also can be worthy. Venus is one of the closet planet to the Earth in terms of density and size but the orbits with the sun of the both planets are completly different, the missions that the spacecraft do not survive, is more challeging with the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus atmosphere, on the surface of the planet can arrive temperatures of eight houndred degrees Fahrenheit, but also they have many metals and gases that can be good for our in different ways and also the curiosity of the of how can take that resources, the NASA is working in try to study that planet with electronic made of silicon that are tested with chaos of Venu's surface. In conclusion Venus is one of the bigger misterys of innovation, if we can following study them maybe some day we can arrive in that planet and also have the materials that we can use to new technology.

The face on Mars is a very interesting thing. It looks like a human head but there is now way it could be because it is two miles long. Some people say that is was made by aliens. NASA says that it is just a rock formation that happend naturaly. There are many arguments for both sides. I'm going to tell you the arguments from the side that says it is just a natural rock formation. This face on Mars is a natural rock formation because, if it were made by aliens than when they got close to it they would have saw things that would be unatural. Another reason is it looks like buttes and mesas that we have here in the United States. Lastly we have been studying this for twenty five years and never before has an alien came up and said, "Hi I made this". The first reason why I thin that this was a natural formation is that we have gotten realy close to the formation and never have we seen any aliens or even any buildings other than the face. On April 8,2001 it was a cloudless summer dday in Cydonia, Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. “We had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view,” said Garvin. “Malin’s team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera’s absolute maximum resolution.” Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. This proves how close they got to the planet and they never had anything happen to the nor did they see anything. Thust proving my first point. Another reason this formation is natural is that there are formation in the United States that have naturlay occured. Buttes and mesas look very similar to the face on Mars. This is what NASA says about it ,what the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa—landforms common around the American West. “It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho,” says Garvin. “That’s a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars.” This shows that there are very simmilar things to the face in our world today. Thus proving my second point. Lastly we have been studying this thing for twenty five years. NASA has been taking pictures of it for a long time now and they have not found any signs of life on Mars. Some people would say that NASA is hiding stuff. NASA would not hide stuff like this for many reasons. Here is what they say about it. The “Face on Mars” has since become a pop icon. It has starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows—even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years! Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars—evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars. Thus proving my third point. So in conclusion there are no signs of alien life on the planet. This is how NASA concluded there point. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. This proves that even though several people think that there is life on mars there is no life and this is a natural formation.

Have you ever wanted to just go out and explore? Being able to see diiferent life would be an amazaing thing to see. Many people want to explore many things, whether it comes with risk or not. The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," believes we should study Venus despite the dangers, snd I feel like we should, even though you don't know what is going to happen I feel like you should still take risk and explore, but there could also be more problems that come along. In the article the author believes we should still go and explore Venus despite the risk that we could encounter. In the article it says, "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth." Astronomers know what the conditions are like on Venus but still continue to want to go and explore it. Also in the article it says, "NASA's possible solution to hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray." They are making solutions to where scientists can go visit and explore Venus without having to deal with the extreme conditions. The scientists are coming across more challenges than dealing with Venus' atmospere. In the article it says, "However, peering at Venus for a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere." With making up a solution to Venus' extreme conditions, there are now more problems that come across because of the solution that protects them from the major conditions. In conclusion, scientist should go and study Venus disregaurding the major conditions. These scientist are very careful and aware of the risk of being on Venus, so they came up with a solution so they don't have to encounter the many harads. You should always go explore things you want to, but you should be aware of risk so you know what to do during the challenge of trying to explore somthing new.