Datasets:

DysfunctionalHuman

/

essay-scoring

like 0

Hey. This is seagoing Cowboys. Seagoing Cowboys is where you get to help other countries recover from world war 2. Here comes why you should join us. First reason you get to help others. Plus you get to see if there are different ways to help us recover faster, so we can have other workers to help out. Last of the first reason leads to the second you can explore the world. Second reason as I said you get to explore the world while doing this. I bet you are wondering how? Well we don't need you to stress out, so we let explores for a little while and then get the next shipment. The last reason is because you get to relax after your shipment of horses and play around with some new friends and laugh and joke around. Luke says on his way back he got to play some baseball and volleyball in the empty holds where the horse use to be. They also had Table-tennis tourneys, fencing, and boxing. If you were not into sports you could whittling and play some games on the floor to pass some time. I think this is a wonderful opportunity for the people who are caring and helpful, so come on and join us.

Do you think going through extreme dangers just to study Venus is worth it? Venus is sometimes called the the Evening Star. Venus is one of the brightest points of light in the sky. Why would scientist wanted to explore and study another planet when they haven't even completely explore the planet where they live on? First of all, Venus is the second planet from our son, while Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved to be a very challenging place to examine closely. Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size. Venus has a very dangerous atmosphere and surface. Venus condituion are highly dangerous its impossible for human to even get close to its atmosphere. Secondly, given the facts that Venus has such critical living condition considering its surface temperature reach over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and has clouds of higly corrosive sulfric acid. Why would scientist still want to explore Venus. Our current technology will not let us enter Venus atmosphere. Even if astronauts manage to bypass Venus atmosphere how would they even get to the ground, Venus surface temperatures are extremely high. It's impossible for humans to get Venus surface. Lastly, instead of wasting resources on exploring new planets and trying to get to their surface, why don't scientists waste those resources in exploring and discovering more of our own planet. More than half of our planet is filled with water, and we haven't explore a big part of it. There must be a lot of new materials and resources out there ready to be explored but scientist are wasting resources on trying to explore a planet. Why don't scientist try to solve the problem with global warming. Those resources scientist are using trying to explore a new planet cab be used to solve problems here on planet Earth. In conclusion, that's why I don't think going through extreme dangers and risk just to only study a planet where its not posibble to live in is worth it. Let's use our resources to solve problems here on planet Earth instead of using them for trying to explore planets.

Are smarter cars really better? What are these cars capable of? Driverless cars should come to an end because the driver must be alert at all times, the driver might get distracted or bored and they are illegal in most states. Driverless cars can drive themselves. It's like watching a pet bird. You still have to be around to make sure nothing happens. In the 7th paragraph, it states,"They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." You are just babysitting the car and you could easily get bored because it's not a baby. Why would you buy a car you can't even drive? "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting on theit turn to drive?" You could get distracted fast, especially if you have a short attention spand. For instant, you have to drive 3 hours and you have nothing to do because you are not driving. That's a cause for distracting and then diaster."Safety is a big concern." and thats why it's not legal in most states. Smarter cars are illegal in most states. In the 9th paragraph, it states that "Lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers. Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." These cars are illegal because there is a lot of untested things that could go wrong. "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedstrians safe." If these driverless cars are crashing into each other, no one going to be safe. Smarter, driverless cars are not better if people are getting hurt. Distracted drivers, that must be alert at all times in unsafe, illegal cars are bad thing for society."We grow closer to the destination every day." Drive Safe.

For many years, researchers have stared at the Mona Lisa. They have made countless observations and have even created this new technology that detects her emotions through facial recognition. Creator Prof. Thomas Huang has named this the Facial Action Coding System. This may not seem very important in the outside world, but the use of Facial Action Coding could be very beneficial in classrooms because it could understand the student's frustration and confusion and would modify the lesson to better fit the student, counselors could use it ot help determine how a student is truly feeling, and it would help teachers better understand the students who rarely talk in their class. Facial Action Coding could be benificial in classrooms because the technology could understand the student's frustration and confusion and modify the lesson to better fit the student. In schools all around, students are starting to give up. They get too angry at their homework and decide that they don't want to work on it anymore. The problems don't change--but with the Facial Action Coding System, the problems and even the lesson itself could change and become easier for the student. This would allow for the student to wrap their mind around the concept that was given to them. In the article, Dr. Huang states in paragraph 6, "'A classroom computer could recognize when astudent is becoming confused or bored... Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.'" This quote tells its readers that that is what Dr. Huang wants this new technology to do. Teachers have to follow a guideline and a lesson plan; they have to be on track as to what the students are learning. Dealing with almost fifteen to twenty students a class, the teacher cannot physically help a student one-on-one all of the time. The Facial Action Coding System, however, would be able to. Making it more simple and more efficient for both the students and teachers. Counselors could also use this technology. Counselors could use the Facial Action Coding System to determine how a student is truly feeling. When sitting in a counselors office, students may be tense or very nervous. Whatever they're in there for, the counselor will have to help that student. With the techonology, counselors could take one look at their face and find out what's bothering them if they are not completely open about it. The counselor would be able to find out if they're sad, upset, scared, or just pulling their strings to get out of class. A counselor's job is to make sure that the students on campus are mentally in check and are ready for the next school year with their classes and progress. When a student enters their office, the technology could sensor the student, making the counselor's job easier and time efficient. When the counselor is done with the student, they're sent back to class. The system could help students and teachers there as well. The Facial Action Coding System may be useful to help teachers understand the students who rarely talk in class or are deaf. In paragraph 6, Dr. Huang makes a wonderful point--"Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication." In class, students will nod their heads when they agree or understand something that their teacher is presenting them with. But what if they don't nod? Facial Action Coding could help the teacher understand that they're going to fast or that the student is lost. The teacher would then be able to assist in further explaining the lesson or even trying to make the lesson more fun and exciting. There are some students who would rather sit in their desks, avoid being wrong, and won't ask questions because they're too shy. This system would give the oppourtunity for students that were never given the chance. Overall, the Facial Action Coding System could be very useful in classrooms due to being able to modify and better fit the student based on their emotions, counselors being able to use it, and as well as letting teachers better understand students who are either deaf or rarely talk. Facial Action Coding may only progress, and progressing it shall.

Dear Senator, I am here today to strongly persuade you to keep in favor of the Electoral College process. Why you ask? Well, the swing states process is when most voters pay attention to the campaign which makes the candide work harder in supporting their argument, and avoiding run-off elections where the election process is greatly complicated but which is avoided by the Electoral College process. This is why I strongly believe that you should keep the process of the Electoral College. In the swing states process the candidates to focus their campain efforts on the toss-up states. Which makes voters most likely to pay close attention to the campaign and make them really want to know that they are going to decide on their elections. "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 candidates)" by, Richard A. Posner also states that the most thoughful voter should be the ones to decide the winner of the election. Lastly, Avoiding run-off elections which is greatly pressured when no candidates wins the majority of the vast cast but is reduced by the Electoral College. Ya sure, It can be argued that this method of choosing the president can turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no intention of carrying their state but, is picked up by voters by paying attention to their campagn which is like the swing states process. Furthermore, due to the swing states process is when most voters pay attention to the campaign and for the candidates to work harder at then making them wanting to here their argument. The Run-off elections process which is greatly pressured when no candidates wins the majority of the vast cast but is reduced by the Electoral College. Yes, Mr. Senator, I strongly infavor of keeping the Electoral College process because of these very important statements why and without it the voting process would be extremly  difficult.          

When growing up, you most likely imagined the future having flying cars. For example, Meet the Robinsons, a movie in which the whole plot of the story is based on time traveling cars! But, to me, having a car that can drive itself is way better. I'll prove it to you. My first example is, you wouldn't have to necessarily get your license! The car drives it for you! I mean, yeah, you might want to know a little about how to drive them if something goes wrong, but none of us would have to go through the 6-9 months of "Drivers ED" that costs a million dollars. You should be able to take a class in high school or grab a book that tells you all about the vehicle, giving you all the information and knowledge you need. Wouldn't that be awesome? Next, less accidents would occur. No, maybe not all because of some freak accident may happen sometime along the way, but less is better than what the rates are now. I mean, most deaths you hear about have something to do with car accidents. Just think about it, all those poeple that have lost a loved one in a car accident most likely would be on board with this. I'm sure they would never want someone else to go through what they went through. Also, old people wouldn't have to get their license revoked becuase they're too old! Everyone can drive! In all honesty, it would just be easier. No worrying about drunk driving, no having to take someone to the doctor with you because you can't drive yourself home with all that medicine in you that makes you wacky, and no more backseat drivers! Oh my goodness they are so annoying! Now, when you think the driving is bad you can yell at the car, (which it shouldn't be but you get what im saying). In conclusion, I hope I have at least altered your opinion in some way, shape, or form to agree with me. I also hope sometime in the future we can all enjoy a driverless car, along with safe roads and better lives.

In this article, "The Challene of Exploring Venus", the author is explaining the difficulties of researching Venus closer, and why it is near impossible due to the challenges the planet provides. The author states what challenges the planet poses, and how scientists are trying to overcome those challenges. The author also says why the planet is worth the risk of exploration. The author supports the claim that Venus is a worthy persuit for exploration, disregarding the dangers, because Venus has many similar geological structures and could have once supported life due to the planet's simularities to Earth, but the author doesn't provide much more evidence as to why it is a worthy persuit. In the same paragraph, a few lines down, the author gives examples of the similar features of terrain that the two planets share. The author says that, "Venus has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." The author means to that the planet has simlar geological features, in the next line the author expands upon what those are. The author states, "The planet has a surface of sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." Through these two sentences from the article the author is contributing to reasons why exploration on the planet Venus is worth it, despite the natural dangers that the planet poses. The fact the two planets share similar physical characterists appeals the claim the author made about Venus being Earth's sister planet. In the fourth paragraph the author gives a few reasons as to why scientists are further discussing the exploration of the planet Venus. The author says that Venus is the most Earth-like planet in the solar system, and it may have housed life at one point. In the second line of the paragraph, the author states, "Austronomers are facinated by Venus because it may once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This peice from the article shows that researchers, or astronomers, are intrigued by Venus because of it's simularities with Earth. Then the author goes into more detail about what those simularites are, in the same paragraph he states, "Venus was probably convered largely with oceans and could have supported varius forms of life, just like Earth." In this sentence the author expands upon what those simularites are, and how the planets are similar because of their attributes, such as the support of different life forms. The detail the author inserted into the article about the resemblance of oceans is significant because life is not possible without oceans, and Venus had them. Both peices of evidence that support what claims the author made as to why research into Venus was a good idea came from the same paragraph. The other seven paragraphs of the article expand upon why exploration isn't possible, how scientists and researchers are trying to overcome the difficulties that the planet provides them with, and what dangers there are. Only one paragraph from the article supports why exploration is intriguing to scientists. In this paragraph, the author supports why exploration towards Venus is being chased, such the similar physical characterists and the possiblity of life. The author doesn't support that idea of further exploration to Venus adequetly because they don't provide enough claims. There are two statements supporting why scientists are facinated by Venus. Why studying Venus is a worthy persuit is a minor detail in the article, the author does not do a well enough job in supporting the motivations behind the scientists.

When you want to do something new ,you go for it. That is what Luke did ,right. The Seagoing cowboy is when you or someone else that helps take care of the animals on a boat , while they are crossing oceans. That is kind of like joining the milatary or the army. You are basically risking your life for other people, some peope you probably don't even know. It can be a lifetime experience. It also can be a huge opprtunity. Like Luke couldn't say no to for trying something new after he was done with school. He was also at a young age. Starting early. After you are done with trying something new, you will realise that you have done something wonderful. While you are working , you also realise that you are having fun while doing it. You could be working hard and having fun at the same time . Some people think ,if you do something that can take your life, isn't fun. I'm just saying if you like to do something then work hard to acomplish it. And I'm not just saying that you have to do that ,but once you do it, you could have fun by doing it. Just like Luke did. Before finishing school , you should make plans for what you want to do. Dont wait to the last minute to think. Making differences is a good thing, not a bad thing. It seemed like Luke didn't know what Seagoing was, but it was something new so he went on and did it. Seagoing can also give you a opprtunity to have fun with animals , if you like them. Luke grew up in farms, so I guess he liked them. He was prepared to work that job. I wouldn't want to do that, because I'm not a big fan about animals. But you like animals, you should try being a Seagoing Cowboy or Cowgirl.

Driverless cars are dangerus to other people. Do the cars still run on gas or are they the new kind that run on solor engergy? What happens if something brakes in the cars GPS and takes to some place els?You can't really tell what kind of truble these cars can be. Driverless cars are dangerus to other people.How can you know when there's some one infrunt of you like a child on a bike?Will the car stop?Probly not with out it being to late for the child. In fact the car might just go out of control and drive on the side walk running over people. Do the cars still run on gas or are they the new kind that run on solor energy? Ok for one if the cars run on gas how smart is that.How are you going to tell the car to stop at a gas station to refill. But if it's on solor energy how long will it last with out sunlight on a ranny day?.Say in the middle of the road you run out of energy and your stuck. What happens if the GPS brakes and takes you yo a diffrent place?You might end up on the other side of the contry or even in the ocean. And if you can't correct the car you might be suck in it for hours.I'd rather not take that chance. In the end these cars are dangrust to everyone.Are they still good for the envierment?Can you stop the car if it starts taking you to a diffrent place? Will it really stop when needed to? You think about it and see what you think mabe you'll even get inside one of these death traps build for a family.

Venus is worth studying even though it has various dangers. There are many things that can be learned from visiting Venus. For example Venus is Earth's twin. It is the closest planet to Earth. Astronomers believe that it was once covered with oceans and could have supported life forms. There are plenty of dangerous things that could happen if someone was to visit the Evening Star. For example in the article it stated that there is "almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. There are challenging clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. The temperature on the planet's surface of over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what it is on Earth." Humans cannot endure these type of conditions. There are more interesting things that can happen if someone was to visit Venus. They believe that this planet is the nearest option for a planetary visit. NASA has an idea that involes a "blimp-like" vehicle that is hovering over the planet, a jet airplane that is at a higher altitude to fly over storms. Another vehicle hovering over the planet that would avoid the horrible ground conditions at thirty plus miles above the surface, the temperatures would be around 170 degrees Fahrenheit; however, the pressure would be close to the sea level on Earth. Overall NASA has it all figured out they just have yet to try this experiment. In conclusion there are many benefits to going to Venus like human curiosity will finally be answered. Another benefit is that the scientists and astronomers get to verify if it is really like Earth and maybe get the things they need to be able to visit the planet. However, there are a lot of cons with visiting Venus. It is very dangerous and can harm many people if they are not careful.

Dear, State Senator, I argue in the favor of keeping the electoral college. I think that it really doesn't matter what a single person vote can do. One vote will not make a difference. The state uses the americans vote, to see what we would pefer. Every vote an ‘ important ' person makes, it counts that. I personally think its a waist of time to vote,that us americans really have no say so in. I bet that if we all didn't vote this next go around, we would still have a president. All because, of what the ‘ important ' people want. All 538 electors know who is better for the United States of America. So, why we vote? The only thing against the electoral college, is what we might call the Disaster Factor. Back, in 1960, segregationist, in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with the new electors who would oppese John F. Kennedy. (So that a popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy.) The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism. 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. The advocates of this position are correct in arguing the the electoral college method id not democratic in a modern sense. It is the electors who elect the president. NOT the people. When you cote for a presidential candidate you're actaully voting for a slate of electos. So, you might as well just let the electoral collge do the job. I mean if you want to go and vote mor power to you. But, like I said its a waist of time to do so!!! Thank you for reading, Ashlee

2020 can't come fast enough. 2020 is the year that Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves. Tesla has projected a 2016 (this year) release for a car capable of driving on autopilot ninety percent of the time. Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific condition since 2009. You could do so much more when you have an independent driving car that you can with a non-independent car, if something is about to happen, you will be warned and it uses half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility that a bus. Beacause of the reasons previously mentioned, I stand in firm affirmation of the development of driverless cars. When you drive a driverless car, you can do so much more with you time in the car. If and when driverless cars become a thing, texting/talking while driving laws could be abolished. But by 2020, texting might even be obsolete and we might be just speaking to the phone while it types for us. We've all known girls who do their make-up in the car on their way to their destination. With non driverless cars, this is extremely dangerous to the driver, the passengers, other cars, and pedestrians. Even though most girls know the danger of this, they haven't stopped, so why not make is safer when they do do it? If something were to happen on the road like an accident ahead, road blocks, consruction, etc., the driver would be warned before hand. The warning could be a number of thing, whether that be a vibration in the seat or a beep. Self-driving cars are so much more eco-friendly than regular non self-driving cars. They use half the fuel of today's taxis. Think of how much fuel that would save America. Less fuel used means less pollution in the sky and it might even help with global-warming. Think of the polar bears and other endangered species! Self-driving cars are a good thing. You could do so much more when you have an independent driving car that you can with a non-independent car, if something is about to happen, you will be warned and it uses half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility that a bus. Beacause of the reasons previously mentioned, I stand in firm affirmation of the development of driverless cars.

The author feels that the pursuit to explore Venus is worthy despite the danger it comes with, he/she supported themselves by making a plan that could overcome the dangers of traveling to Venus. NASA´s plan to send humans to Venus safely could very well work but also the way they would be thirty miles above the planett floating will not reallu give them a good look at what they are trying to study. ¨ More importantly, researchers cannot take samples of rock,gas,or anything else, from a distance.¨, which was stated in the article. The planet Venus has such harsh conditons that humans could not withhold and survive, an example would be that ¨The temperatures average out at over 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.¨ which was stated in the article. In my own opinion it would not be smart to even begin to plan a trip to Venus,especially when scientists and NASA know the risks and dangers, it would as if you are setting up their own death if even a spacecraft cannot survive the landing for more than a few hours. My conclusion is that the author stated his point very well and had some good arguments as to why we could send humans to Venus, but I do not agree with the authors point of view on this topic.

I think that the face on the surface of mars is a natural landform. I dissagree that it is made by aliens or any living organism. The reason I think that the face is a natural landform is because if it was made by aliens then I think there would be more of them not just one. With us humans we have many different statues monuments tall skyscrapers not just one of them. For example the pyramids they we obviously were not naturally made but there are many of them that are exactly the same. So if that was made by aliens I feel like there would be many more that resembled the landform or some other odd landforms. In the 12th paragraph of the article it says this is a martian equivalent of a Butte or mesa so there are many things that are odd that happned naturlly on Earth also. In the passage Garvin said,"It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the snake river plain of Idaho". Garvin also said,"That there is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa that is about the same height as the face on mars." My next point is that many people say that N.A.S.A is just keeping secrets of aliens away from the public. If there were aliens than N.A.S.A would probably tell them becuase it would get them so much more publicity and therefore probably more money to fund a mission to mars. So I think that would just be a stupid idea if they kept it a secret. In conclusion I think that the face on mars is a natural landform and not made by alies

Dear Senator of Florida, What is the point of people voting if they are not really getting a say in who they are really voting for? The Electoral College has a bigger say then the thousands of of people who vote. How can a group of peoples say mean more then thousands of people in the United States. Also, the "Winner-Take-All" sytem does not help anymore then the Electoral college does. What is so special about the Electoral College that they get picked specially to make their vote count on who wins or loses the election? Their has been many mishappens because of the Electoral College. For example, from an excerpt called "The Idefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" says "The single argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disastor factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worst." This shows that the electoral college does do damage to the United States because they let a huge crisis happen during the elections. They could have let it get even worst because they allow it to and make it easy to make things worst in certain crisis. I feel like you should give the people more of a say because half of the people that vote problably don't even know that they are not actually voting for the president. They probably vote thinking that they are voting for the president not for the electoral college to see who will end up on the board. The Electoral College is overall unfair to the voters. Voters pay to vote, to what pay the Electoral College to vote and make their say so important it is sad. The reason it is sad is because all kids want to do when their younger is vote because they feel like it symbolizes them growing up and like they get a real say in who the next president is or the senate anything just as longs as they get a say. But truthful their not getting a say in who will be the next senate, treasurer, or president their actually picking the board who will be picking for them. Even the People once wanted to abolish the Electoral College. These People were Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO. Turned out their not the only ones according to the exerpt from "The Indefensible Electoral College: why even the best-laid defenses are wrong." is sates "They're not alone; according to a Gallup poll in 2000 taken shortly after Al Gore- thanks the quirks of the electoral college- won the popular vote but lost the presidency, over 60 percent of the voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." It also states that "This year voters can expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again lose the presidancy." This show how the elections are in a way screwed up because they already in a way know how many votes a certain person is going to get and how many votes the other person is going to get. They practicly alredy know who is going to win the election before the voting even begins because the board already has it all planned out. So really thier is no need for the Electoral College because all they do is make the competion unfair for the other person going for the election. Also, because they have cause or been a part of problems and mishappens. In an article it mentions "Perhaps moat worrying is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. In that case, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, were staes delegation vote on president." Also, when you are voting for the Vice-President you are not actually voting the senat picks who the Vice-President is. The Electoral College is overall unfair to the voters and the people running in the election.

Facial expressions and emotions drive the actions of people everyday. These emotions are sometime hidden, fake or very transparent. I believe that using this Facial Action Coding System in class rooms, will be quite valuable to the learning enviroment and education of idividuals. It will increase learning efficiancy, focus in the class room, and productivity of the students. The Facial Action Coding System essentially scans your face for emotion and makes decisions based on the results. This would be very valuable in a classroom especially those of younger students and gradeschool. During school students can be unmotivated to learn, bored or confused in the classroom. These problems can waste time and cause students to not fully understand and learn the topic. If this system can produce the outcome predicted this will lessen the amount of time, and help students to understand the topic more and at a quicker rate. By moving at the students speed and manipulating the lessen at points where the student is confused can be more efficient than the classrooms now. This system will eliminate the wasted time, bordem and provide solutions for those confused. As well as increasing the efficiency, this sytstem can also benefit the classroom enviroment. When students become bored or unmotivated, they can become a distraction in the classroom. Teachers then have to take time to meet the need the student has. This disruption in the class can catch the attention of other students and cause them to stop working and or act as the other student is. Distractions like these cause learning to be hindered and if eliminated it can better the learning enviroment for teachers and students. This system, can keep students active and motivated to learn, providing less of a chance to be a distraction. Furthermore, if distraction, bordem and unmotivation is eliminated or improved in the classroom enviroment, this can increase productivity. Students when bored or unmotivated essentially stop working, and students who are confused work at a slower pace. These problems cause the work that needs to be done, not completed or completed slower than neccessary. This system can keep the attention of students and create a path that the student learns at their own rate, thus completing the work that needs to be done ontime or quicker. This can benefit the classroom because teachers do not need to review topics that some students might have understood but others have not. In conclusion this system is the most efficient, productive and helpful tool that a class room could be aquipped with. It eliminates bordem and unmotivation, causes more efficient learning and allows productivity in the classroom to increase. All teachers should implement this tool in their classroom if presented the opportunity.

In the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile," the new technology called " Facial Action Coding System," would identify human emotions. In the first paragraph the author is telling you about Mona Lisa and what the doctors are trying to tell others. The software is almost like yourself talking to a person and knowing their emotions, but in a computer. Dr. Paul Eckman and Dr. Huang are working together to see how to work and use the latest innovation. Some are asking questions like " Can we actually calculate emotions?" or " How can a computer recognize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express our emotions?" I as of the rest of the curious world would want to see how this new technolgy works. Dr. Huang and Dr. Paul Eckman are working to make this to only bring smiles to someones face each day as shown is paragraph six. Dr. Huang believes that students doing homwork on a computer usually become more bored while doing something boring on a computer, so Dr. Huang and Dr. Paul Eckman want to have a computer know about your feelings like people do. As shown in paragraph eight muscles show that some actions might show others that you either have a forced smile or an genuine one. So letting computers know how you feel and helping you genuinly smile would help your day and help Both Drs. know they had helped sombody have a better day. When you smile to show "Mona Lisa Smile" to the computer it will show an add appearing on your screen and then a similar afterwards. If you frown the ad will be different after the first one proving that you aren't happy. The new software could help others become more energectic and happier on most days other than frowning and having an awful day. Dr. Huang and Dr. Paul Eckman are proving to the world that increasing happiness will help other feel better on a daily basis and want to do more.

Lets face the facts the face on Mars is nothing more than clever illusion. The face that you have no doubt seen on mars isn't proof of alein life it just doesn't make logical sense. The higher quality photos don't even show the face, and why would NASA cover up somthing that would help them with their budget issues. Its clearly just rock formation just like ones we have on earth. First of all the first picture was just a lucky happenstance. When NASA went back in to get a higher quality photo, it wasn't there. The face was just a product of clouds and outdated equipment. "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." (P10) The best quality photo, and it looked less like a face and more like a pile of broken dreams. Some hardcore conspiracy theorists might say NASA was trying to pull a wool over our eyes and cover up the existents of extraterestrial life with fake pictures. But why would NASA cover somthing as earth shattering as aliens, the publicity alone would help push the government to extend their budget." 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." (P5) Why would litteral rocket scientists cover up something that would help the massively. Thirdly it's just like rock formations we have on earth. In the article one scientist even says it looks just like a butte we have on Earth. " It reminds me of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho" (P12) We are all losing our heads over somthing that we could drive to Idaho in a matter of hours to see. Overall only crazy conspiracy nuts could ignore the facts to this degree. Its was a one time photo that happened almost 40 years ago. People need to quit ignoring the facts and see whats right in front of them. The face on Mars is just a natural land form that, under the right conditions, can look like a face.

The venus are sometimes called the Evening Star is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky making it simple for even an amteur stargazer to spot. The second plant form our sun it has proved to be an challenging place to examine more colsely. Venus nickname misleading sice Venus ia actually a planet in our solar system.Venus ia distant but the safe vantage point of earth it has proven to be challenging. Venus is referred to as Earth's twin Venus the closest planet to Earth terms of density and size and occsionally the closest to Earth. Veuns is sometimes around the coner-in space terms- humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud- draped world.The Earth, Venuns, Mars the neighbor orbit in different speed the differences in speed. Each previous mission was unmanned,and for good reason since no spacecraft survived the landing for more the a few hours maybethis issue explains why not a single spacship has touched down on Venus in more then three decades. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's repiutation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us .

The coming of the future is upon us, and as this new era approaches a plethora of innovative ideas come crashing along with it. One of these ideas is the possibilty of driverless cars. As welcoming as this sounds it has not been totally accepted by everyone in society. The reasons driverless cars should become a reality are mainly because they're safer, more efficient, and more convienient for the driver. The most important reason that driverless cars need to continue to be developed is that they're overall safer than normal human driven cars. One of the cars, manufactured by Google with the aid of Toyota, is equipped with position-estimating sensors, a rotating sensor (LIDAR) , a video camera on the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. A car outfitted with this technology can operate at the skill of a human without making the mental human errors. People argue that technology can't replace humans in every scenario, such as roadblocks or the unexpected stoppage of a car in front of you. Technology has already prepared for this and there are sensors in place to alert the driver when human interaction is needed. These sensors include vibrating seats, flashing windshield lights, and other headsup displays. Another reason that the devlopment of driverless cars needs to continue is because they're more efficient than ordinary cars. Google cofounder, Sergey Brin, envisions a future with a fleet of driverless cars for a taxi system that would use half the fuel of today's taxis, and would offer much more flexibility than a bus. These innovations would save your wallet from the gas station, and your back from the crowded bus seats. The final reason that driverless cars should be the way of the future is how convenient they are for the passenger. Driverless cars allow the passenger to talk, phone call, text, eat, etc without putting other drivers at risk. Tesla has even reported that a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time should be released in 2016. Nissan, Audi, and Mercedez-Benz have made similar reports for the year 2020. Who's to say more advancement won't be mad in the ever so near future? In conclusion the reason that the devlopment of driverless cars is a positive thing is because they will improve the safety of the drivers and the road, they're more efficient for your wallet and your comfort, and they're more convenient than normal cars.

Venus, the Evening Star is a gorgeous planet to look at in the night sky but is a deadly planet to step foot on. Scientists and astronomers are finding various ways to either put a human on the planet or send another spacecraft over to sit in the air longer than a couple of hours like the past ones that were sent. First venus has a lot of flaws and conditions where humans wouldn't be able to outstand. In the text it states, "On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit..." (The Challenge of Exploring Venus) No human would be able to outstand that burning tempature without some type of aircraft or special suit. Also in the text it states, " and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." (The Challenge of Exploring Venus) You would just crush if you were placed on this planet. These condition are way more extreme than anything us humans have encountered. Second, even though scientists and astronomers know how dangerous venus is and how terrible their conditions are, they are fascinated and want to learn way more about it. They believe venus is the most Earth like planet in our solar system. In the text it states. "Long ago, Venus was probaly covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth." (The Challenge of Exploring Venus) If so, this would be a good reason to explore and find out more things that used to be on this planet. The text also states, "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." (The Challenge of Exploring Venus) After reading all of this, it can show that Venus can be our only closest option for a planetary visit in the furutre. In conclusion, there are a lot of pros and cons in sending a human or spacecraft to the planet Venus. The planet Venus is deadly and if someone steps on the planet without the proper grear or spacecraft, it will lead to a tragic but obvious death. But soon, curiosity will lead us humans to the planet to evaluate and study the planet Venus.

Dear state senator , i strongly believe in keeping the electoral college to be in chare of the way the elections would proceed instead of changing the outcome of elections to popular vote because voters may not believe in what the candidate's intentions for the people but may like the candidate, it is more organized , and the people would be pleased with the outcome. The electoral college is a great way of proceeding with elections because changing the way our election system is to one of popularity voting would not be wise because voters may not believe in what the candidate's intentions are for the people but they may like the candidate. There is more of a certainty when the electoral college is in charge for example when Obama was running against Romney he only received 61.7% of the electoral vote compared to the 51.3% percent of the popular votes that have been casted for both him and Romney but because of the majority percentage of electoral votes that were casted in his favor. The electoral college is more organized than a popular vote because if a voter has voted for example Obama for the electoral vote but voted for Romney for the popular vote it would be unorganized because of the split vote between popular and electoral which is recquired the majority of when in a public govermental election which could impact the whole future for the nation. The election for Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 they both had only a 43 percentage plurality of popular votes while also winning a majority in the electoral college which was (301 and 370 electoral votes) . When no candidate fully wins the majority of the votes that were casted they wouldn't have to recount the votes of have a re-election which would drain the economies money because of the high amount of money put into one election in the first place just to have another election, whereas the electoral college can just step in and rectify the situation just by producing a clear winner on their own instead of going through a long process just to find out who the clear winner is all they have to do is debate among themselves who they believe the people would be happy with in the long run . Electoral college is the best way because in the long run the people would be pleased with the outcome that they have voted for because if it was turned into a popular vote election people who voted for a specific president wouldn't have won just because they aren't popular amongst the people that are voters iin that year's election . However the popular vote election may also be a good idea because if the voters cast a vote for you in the  popular election that should essentially like your intentions that would benefit the countries needs and demands that are recquired for us in the long run. Therefore the electoral college should stay in charge of all decsions having to do with the elections for new presidencey when the time time comes because if it was changed to popular vote people would vote for the candidate that they like the best instead of the candidate with the best intentions for the nation, it is considerably more organized than a popular vote election , and the people would be end up being pleased with the outcome in the long run.

In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negitive aspects of the driverless cars. The cars would be very helpful in controlling accidents and collisions. The driverless car cars are still developing to be completely driverless but for now they still requires a person to be prepared to take the wheel to navigate through an accident or a road block. In the following paragraphs I will explain the pros and cons of these driverless cars. The cars use cameras and sensors to model the cars 3D surroundings. A combination of the cameras and sensors help the car mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. A person must always be aware and ready to take the wheel when problems occur. If someone is on a long car ride inside one of these driverless cars they would most likely become bored and wouldn't be paying any attention to the road. If a problems were to arise and the drivers is asleep or not paying attention when the car needs the driver to take over the drivers reaction would be delayed and an accident could occur. Say the driver was not paying attention or sleeping and the car got into a wreck is it the drivers fault or the manufacturer's fault? How would you know who was at fault? I feel the cars will never be fully safe because a computer cannot fully mimic a humans reactions, a human may know better what to do than a computer in certain situations, also in certain cases it could be the other way around. There are certain laws in place to protect drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. All traffic laws are written assuming there is a human driver. Many states do not allow the testing of computer driven cars. More states will allow computer cars as soon as they are reliably safe. Law makers must consider that new laws need to be put in place to cover liability in case of an accident to protect both the manufacturer and the people involved in the accident. These computer driven cars will make daily life easier. Just imagine never having to buy a car again but calling a computer driven taxi to pick you up. As long as these cars are safe and reliable they will be a part of our everyday lives. These cars will lower the accident rates and keep people safe.

The Mars Face has been a popular topic for ages. People still argue about if its an alien artifact or just a nutural formation on Mars. Some people are thinking NASA is just lying. Some people at NASA wish that they had found evidence of alien life. The Mars Face is a natural landform known as a mesa. These landforms are commun throughout the west part of America. These landforms are formed by plate tectonics. There are a lot of landforms on Earth that are the same as the Mars Face. The face got its look from shadows. The Viking 1 spacecraft did not have a high level of technology. The space age has developed lots of technology since the 1970's. I mean they just got a man on the moon a few years prior to the Viking 1. So in 1998 a high level camera did fly over and take very graphic and detailed pictures of the Face showing it's just a landform. Since the technology level wasn't very good in 1976 they couldn't zoom in like the Mars Orbiter Camera Team did, so the shadows were apparent there and not in the 1998 photograph. The pixel size is greater in the 2001 photo than the 1976. The reson the face appeared was because of the technology level back in 1976 they Viking 1 couldn't zoom in far enough to get past the shadows. With this evidence I hope you're convinced there are no aliens on Mars or ever was. NASA would be estactic if they found alien life. The Face is not an alien made memorial or artifact. The Face is a natural landform that occurs on our own planet.

Wow! Can you imagine driving a car that you do not actually have to drive? When you think about this do you ever think about how complacted and dangourus these cars could be? I want tell you about the malfunctions, distractions, and the new laws that would make having driveless cars absolutly difficult. The drivless cars would reqiure a lot of sensors in the passage it list a few of these off ''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 receiver, and inertial motion sensors." What would happen though if one or two of these sensors broke while you were driving? A few possible things could happen car stops in the middle of the road, a serious injury, or mabey possible fatality. Some people might argue that it could be an easy fix or nothing too bad could happen, but that easy fix probably is not to cheap and unless you consider death not being not to bad then why take the risk? Crashes often happen due to distractions. We'll when people don't have to drive a car they probably wont be paying attention to the road. The drivless cars are not technally all the way driveless it says in the text that " They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills.." What if this so call notifaction does not do the job and the driver ramains distracted and crashes. Some people might argue that the notifaction would be to noticable to ignore, but the fact is this wouldnt always be the case, and the driver could remain distracted and crash. Driveless cars would put more work on investergators due to crashes and who to blame the driver or the manufacture? In the text it states this " new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault the diver or the manufacturer?" This question would be hard to answer and the law that would be needed for this could take forever to be approved. Not to metion all the money that would be needed in court if something like this were to happen. Someone might argue that after awhile that law would be just like any other law, but that statement is just not true the law that would be needed for something like this would be by far extreamly complacated and confusing. When you think about how cool it would be not having to drive your car to go places you should probably think agin. You should begin to question the malfunctions, distractions, and new laws that you would have to deal with. You should also think about the dangours you are making for yourself, family, friends, and your community.

The Author supports the idea of studying venus. In paragraph 2, "the author says that numerous factors conmtribute to Veunus reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study on". Another reason why from the author that humans should study venus and wothy pursuit. In paragraph 3, sentence 4 "it says that the conditions are far moire extreme than anything humans can study on encounter". My reason why i think humans should study venus and worthy pursuit despite the danger is because in paragraph 1, sentence 1 its that in sted of calling it venus they call is Evening star and it is one of the brightest of the light in the night sky. Now in the last sentence its say that it proved a very challenging place to examine more closely. But in my own words i think it is a good idea for humans shoukld study venus because it gives you fun facts about it , How i know that is because in paragraph 8, the last sentcene its talking about you get to travle on earth and you it to see whats beyond you should not be limited by dnager or anything else. And another evidence you get to learn about new things in life and it can be a challenge for you in life also. My conclusion to this hole essay is if you can explorie anything in life then you can take a risk and in doing a challenge on exploring venus or another name for it Evening star. Not just because it can give you a fun fact it can give you a differnet experion on other people and you can show other people that there can be a differnce in everythiung that you can do.

The advantages of limiting car usage is starting to become a lot more common. People are starting to realize that their happier when not riding their car, in fact Heudrun Walter mother of 2 said "when i had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Walter now can walk the streets and enjoy the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children. Us humans rely to much on our cars for transportation, We should learn how to get to places on our own. Before we had cars we walked on our own 2 feet and didnt complain, its time for us to get back part of our humanity. "All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change",said David Goldenberg, an official of Transportation for America. If cars were to all of a sudden disappear would you be capable of getting around without a vechicle of transportation? In Bogota, Colombia a program was set to have a car free day. The only way of transportation was through buses and taxis, and violators would have to pay a $25 fine. "It was a good opportunity to take away stress and lower pollution" said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. Not only does not riding your car lower pollution but it can also help lower emissions, conserve resources, and improve safety. The goal is to limit car usage and to start noticing the advantages of a car free life, like walking the streets and enjoying another beautiful day. Fellow citizens I advice you to put down you car keys and go outside to smell the clean air, see the sun shining on your face and get a breeze of how life would be from outside the windows of your car. We can help make our environment be a better place all you have to do is start taking action and realize their are more advantages to limiting car use then car usage its self.

i dont believe that driverless cars would be a good influence on our population. I say that because i dont think people would use these cars as good use. People wouldnt use these cars for good reason because they would take advantage of it because it can drive on its own, I know it would have a built in camera for our eyes on the road but lets just be real here noone will even take a glance at the road. These cars are really smart cars and all but what does this car do for us? I really think these cars wouldnt do us any good because none of us wouldnt want to drive anymore because it drives on its own therefore that would make us all lazy drivers. im sure these cars know alot but they probably dont know the importance of driving under roads that are under construction, or bad weather, slick roads. Which concerns me of all of our safety, and all our lives at risk. What if the roads are very slick and its foggy outside? i dont think the car can drive through that type of weather because at times it is very hard for us humans to drive under that condition. Most of us have children and passengers while driving with us all the time i am very concerned of their safety too, what if they are not comfortable with these cars, they want you to take control of the wheel. We all have our opinions on things but these cars i really dont like the idea of it. Like money wise the cars would cost us millions probably for it and there are more important things in the world to buy, we really dont need to spend all our money on these cars. Gas money for these cars what if these cars use a lot of gas? We would have to spend like another 80 to 90$ on gas too. The car what if the car alert system or camera stops working? We have no other choice but to take the wheel, it shouldnt take all that money for a car and for something to happen to it and we have to end up driving it anyways, so we shouldnt even have this idea of these cars in my opinion its a waste of money. In conclusion i dont think it would be a good idea for us to have this new source of techinology because most of us wont even use it right and it could cause all kinds of problems.

Cars are not something that have to be used everyday. Limiting car usage could be a good thing to do. Minimizing car usage gives you the opportunity to have more parks and fun places to go without the parking lot taking up all the space. Less space for parking makes everything more easier to get to which is an advantage instead of having to walk in the parking lot . For example, " . . . make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation, with less space for parking." ( In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, Elisabeth Rosenthal, Paragraph 6 ). This explains that if you get rid of the cars theres more space to park and everything else becomes easier to get to versus having many parking spaces taking up room and causing traffic and other things. Also with not using cars theres more room for small stores and big stores to be put in different places that couldnt be put there because of cars so you could drive. For example, " . . . stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway." ( In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, Elisabeth Rosenthal, Paragraph 6 ) and " Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour retsrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." (Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota, Andrew Selsky, Paragraph 28). This shows that now there's more spaces for even more stores which is an advantage because the cars used to take up that space used for bigger roads for more cars to come on but without that problem theres room for other thing's. Also it's a good way to save money because it decreases smog, and air polllution. For example, " Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog." ( Paris bans driving due to smog, Robert Duffer, Paragraph 14).  This shows that after France decided to stop using cars the smog decreased tremendisely. Having no vehicles can also make the environment better because there wouldnt be a lot of carbon being produced. For example, " . . . it will have a benificial implications for carbon emissions and the environment." ( The End of Car Culture, Elisabeth Rosentha, Paragraph 34). Which is an example of how it could better for the environment. An advantage also is there will be less pollution. For example, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution . . ." This explains that it would be a good thing for us , we would have better breathing and also again a better environment . In Conclusion, Minimizing driving usage could lead to better things such as less pollution, a better environment , and lastly more room for other things . So theyre are many advantages to minimizing driving usage, it's not so bad.      

The use of the Facial Action Coding System technology is to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom which is not valuable to a classroom. In my honest opinion I believe it is very unnecessary. The first reasoning is that this technology that was developed was developed for a very different purpose than the usage of a classroom. My second reasoning is that the technology doesn't even claim to detect the boredness of the students. Others may argue that it will help students in a positive way but they are completely wrong because it will do up to nothing for them. All these reasonings combined are the main factors as to why i believe that the usage of this technology is not valuable in the school environment. My first reasoning as to why i believe that this facial and emotional recognition technology is not valuable in a classroom setting is because the sole purpose as to why it was built was to detect emotions in an individual. It was not developed to help students make learning easier in any way. According to the article 'Making Mona Lisa Smile' by Nick D'Alto, "New software has been developed that improves the accuracy in percieving the emotions of others. This new software, the Facial Action Coding System, has promising application for a variety of industries." This is evidence that helps support my claim because it is a statement that explains the purpose of this new technology which is only for the detection of emotions in the face of humans and not to help young students to advance their school life. Also, according to the article 'Making Mona Lisa Smile' by Nick D'Alto, "By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions (as in da Vinci's masterpiece). Each expression is compared against a neutra face (showing no emotions)." This statement/quote is evidence of my claim because again it states the true purpose of this technology and what it is truly used for; not once in that statement had it discussed how it would help students better their education. My second reasoning as to why i believe this technology is not best fit for the school environment is because the technology is used to only detect 6 emotions and using it to help teachers combat "boredom" within their student is not one of them. The article 'Making Mona Lisa Smile' by Nick D'Alto states, " Eckman has classified six basic emotions-hapiness,surprise,disgust,fear and sadness- and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles." This is evidence because the quote clearly states that the emotions that are detectable are not inclusive to boredome if the technology can't detect boredom or confusion then how can it help with the students. The article 'Making Mona Lisa Smile' by Nick D'Alto also states, "'A classroom computer could recognize when a students is becoming confusesd or bored,' Doctor Huang predicts." This is evidence of my claim/reasoning because this statement by the creater of this technology even says it COULD happen which leads us to infer that it probably would not happen anytime soon, meaning that although this technology is smart it still may not be able to help students out. Others may argue that the usage of this Facial Action Code System will help students positively in the classroom but they are completely wrong. This system may not even help them at all. According to the article 'Making Mona Lisa Smile' by Nick D'Alto, "'Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication,' notes Dr.Huang 'So computers need to understand that, too.'" This is evidence as to why those that argue it is a positive effect is wrong because the inventer of this technology basically stated the technology has more to understand (such as the emotional communications of humans), meaning that this technology may not fully comprehend all of the emotions of not just humans but students if this technology was to be placed in the classroom settings. Also according to the article 'Making Mona Lisa Smile' by Nick D'Alto, "'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.' The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgery." This is evidence because it states what it could do for a students which is adding more cartoon expresions and thats basically about it. It doesn' really help out a students when theyre confused just because there are more animated cartoons. In conclusion, I believe that the Facial Action Coding System is not a valuable usage in a classrrom of students. First, the technology was built for asole purpose of detecting facial emotions and not to help students in any way but add cartoons. Second, the technology is not advanced enough to even detect emotions of boredom in students , it can only detect six emotions in which bored is not one. Others may argue that it will positively impact the students but they are completely wrong because it literally does nothing for them. Finally, in my most honest opinion this technology is mainly useless in a classroom which is why it is clearly not valuable in a classroom environment that includes students.

Cars are an integral part of many peoples' lives around the world: they provide transportation to work and home, they cater to social lives, and for some they even provide a home. However, it's becoming a trend to limit car usage, particularly in Europe. Residents in Vauban, Germany have given up cars almost completely, with the exception of a $40,000 parking garage fee that over half of the residents have elected not to use. While it may make getting places harder, the effects of cutting down on car usage are mostly good ones. First and foremost on this list is global warming. In Europe, cars produce around twelve percent of greenhouse emmissions, while in the US, the number can be as high as fifty percent in cities. This is not good. Global warming is destroying the ice caps and the ozone layer of Earth, leading to a temperature increase that is damaging many enviornments around the world. This, in addition to pollution released by cars and the oil industry, could permanantly cripple our planet. Any way that we can cut the effects of global warming should be implemented. Secondly, crowded cities benefit in many ways from a lessening of driving. Some cities, like Paris, have already had to enact a partial ban on driving due to a heavy smog layer. Other cities, like Beijing, is even more polluted, and cities in this country suffer as well. If less people drove, the air would be clearer, as was the case in Paris. Also, there is less crowding when less people are driving. Anyone who has driven through or lived in a large city knows just how bad congestion and traffic jams can be. Less driving would mean less congestion, making it easier for people to get to work, school, or other locations on time. When Paris enacted its driving ban of those with even-numbered liscence plates, congestion went down sixty percent. Finally, using an alternative to cars can save money. Public transportation could be expensive and, frankly, overcrowded, but it provi  

You know what i do agree on what this article is saying why because people tend to use their cars all the time and yea what if we live far from town ok thats fine but i see people in my naighborhood driving two streets down just to hang out with there friends when one could simply just i mean put it this way if we were to drive less we would limit accidents , tickets, and polution so come with me as i explain my ideas. You might ask your self how would this limit accidents well say you were driving one night to your best friend jeffs house and jeff lives three streets but you wanted to get there faster and the car on the oppisite lane the driver falls asleep and all of a sudden boom!! you dont know what just happen think about you could of been dead right in that instant but if you would of walked no accident you could of dodged the car. Tickets and people might say " man, police be racist pulling me over for know reason and now i have to pay a fine and go to court" no buddy you were pulled over because you were being stupid on the road trying to act cool in front of your friend but see maybe if you where riding a bike or walking you probaly would of never got pulled over and  wouldnt have to pay a fine. Less polution polution is really bad in alot of countries i mean its so bad that its kind of hard to breathe i mean it would suck if yoy were on vacation in the carrabians trying to enjoy a nice tropical day outside but you can't why because you can bearly breathe with all that polluted air around so yea. I mean its not hard to ride a bike or to get a electric scooter or a moped or walk it benefits you and our earth i mean i agree with driving just to places you need to go like traval or grocrey shopping not to race act dumb or black smoke people i we made a don't drive your car week it would really benefit our earth alot.       

The author suports the ideas as to how Venus is a worth planet to study despite the dangers it represents. Even doe Venus is such an imposible planet to get into, despite how Venus is a planet where spacecrafts sent and didnt survive the landing for more than a few hours. Despite how Venus surface temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Scientists still want to try and get to Venus even if it tooks impossible According to the passage humans have sent numeous spacecrafts on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more tha three decades. Now not only do humans want to study Venus but humans now contribute to Venus's reputation as a challeging planet for humans to study. Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets. The surface, temperatures averages over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Which means that is impossible for a human being to walk around Venus's surface. NASA has one particular idea of how humans can study in Venus. This particular idea is to make vehicles that hover 30 or so miles above Venusian Landscape. Just as how airplanes fly over many storms. Because Venus atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide and the surface is super hot then hovering above its landscape would make it easier for scientist to study. In conclusion NASA'S posible solution has to be spot on because in more than three decades not a single spaceship has toched down on Venus. Not only are they thinking of one soution but Scientist have been thinking of possible solution such as simplified electronts made of silicon carbide they have been tested in chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and this has shown some good results because in the test the electronics made from silicone lasted for three weeks. Either way Scientist are still studing on how to get to Venus no matter how hard and impossible it looks they have hope and hope to one day get to that panet and make a whole new worl out of it.

Driverless cars will be the future cars of America. Techonolgy just keeps changing the world for the better. Driveeless cars will change the world one day. Google has had cars that could drive independently under conditions since 2009. That is only the start of these fantastic cars. The driverless cars will still be under construction for awhile, before they truly can be operated all by themselevs. Googles car have driven more than half a millon miles without a crash. Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or diffcult traffic issues. There are still things that need to be added to the car. The most important bit of techonolgy in this system is the spinning sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near rearview mirror, four automotive radar senors, a GPS receiver, and an intertial motion sensor. All of these senors to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. Having a driverless car would be the perfect route to go. By 2050 everyone will not have to drive anymore. Within 10 years, those senors have become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers. The senors can now cause the car to apply brakes and reduce power from the engine. It allows far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone. It is safe to me. I would be very comfterable driving a driversless car. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to let the driver know when the road ahead requires hman skills. Such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. The driver must stay alert and be ready to take over at any given time. I could trust myself enough to drive one of these fasinating cars. Driverless cars are deffiently still a working process. I do believe one of these days driverless cars will be the real deal. This started in the late 1950s, eventually these cars will be on the market. When they are availbe to buy I will be owning a driverless vechile.

The Face found on May 24, 2001 is formed by a natural landform. At the begninng of the article 'Unmasking the Face on Mars" it states, New high-resolution images and 3D altimertry from NASA's Mars Global Survery spacecarrt reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa. This sentece is telling the reader the truth right then and there. The face infact is formed by a natural landform, a mesa which are landforms common around the American West. In paragraph 2 it tells us, the readers, that scientists figured the face was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia but only had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptain Pharaoh. In paragraph 8 it gives a reasonn on why maybe the alien markings showed up on the face. The camera that took the photograph of the face had to peer through a wispy cloud to see the face. Perhaps the alien figures had been caused by the cloudy surface. In paragraph 6 Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program said, " We felt this was important to taxpayers. We photographed the Face as soon as we could get a good shot at it." Jim was still trying to get the truth to the people after 18 years long of the Viking mission ended. Althoug targeting Cydonia was not easy, on April 5, 1998 Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team from Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia flew and took a picture ten times sharper than the orginal Viking photos. Soon the image showed up on a JPL wed site, revealing what the truth was a natural landform that caused the face to appear on Mars.

Many people across the country would believe that having an Electoral College is good idea. Well, I belive thst it is not a good idea to continue having an Electoral College to chose our president because the people deserve to have their votes count. In the prcocess of having an Electoral College the poular votes do not count, only the slate of electors can vote for the canidate. That's not even the worst part to begin with. In source 2, it says that 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now. That is more than half the amount of voters in the country! It even states "In the same vein, faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's canidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please." meaning that sometimes the electors would not always have the same idea in mind as the people have. To me that is a real bummer especially for the people in the state with those kinds of electors. Furthermore, the Electoral college may have a few benefits as it states in source 3. Fore example, it says "The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no canidate receives a majority of the votes cast." meaning that barely anyone would vote in the state. But that is usually a rare ocasion and is easily avoided in every state. As individuals we would usually not avoid coming to vote in an election for certain positions especially when it comes to a president. Sometimes people would even let the Electoral College vote for them without the people knowing who they voted for. The Electoral College is supposed to represent their state towards a canidate but what if the state rarely has any electors to be represeted or doesn't have any at all? That is why it is up to the people to make their own decision in who they want to vote for and hopefully their vote counts. The Electorial College may be recomended to represent their state but they can never represent every individual's vote because not all people have the same canidate in mind and the Electorial College can only vote for one canidate. Overall, I think the Electoral College should be abolished in every way. It is the people's vote that should count not the electors. Some people may disagree but I still believe the Electorial College is not good for us. It is not truely fair to have the majority of popular votes on one canidate and still that canidate does not win due the Electoral College. So I can most certainly agree with what previous people and groups have said before such as Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S Chamber of Commerance, and the AFL-CIO.... To get rid of the Electoral College.     

I think that we shouldnt have driverless car they can be dangerous for us human being and others arounds us. Having driverless can effect us human by thinking ''Oh we dont have to pay attention to the road the cars know what to do.'' But what if the computer function stop working and the driver is not paying attention and hit a other car . Who fault would it be the driver or the manufacture? It cant be the driver fault ,Why because if the manufacture did as many test run on the driverless car why would the computer system shut down ? who fault is that on not the human its the car . A other reason i think we shouldnt have driverless is the money and cost they have to put in the make this driverless car to work . Image all the technogley that the manufacture has to have to make it work and the test run it would have to have done to it . The total of money they would have to use be like millions of dollars. That money can be use on something more helpful in the world. The car would be to expensive to some people to afford to buy. What if they couldnt sell the car since they would so expensive to afford no one would buy. It would just be money going to waste and the time and effort they but to it . If they would be to change the laws how would us human react to it ? Would we follow or start protest for it. Why should we follow the laws if some of us human doesnt have this driverless car . What if the driverless car crashes in to a basic regular car and causes bad damage to the other car for the person ti die ? Who would get it worse the basic car or the driverless car ?

Is it a landform? There is a big thing over if the Face on Mars is just a landform or if it is alien related. As NASA is reseaching it and there is just threories over it. As NASA belives it is just a Natural Landform. Yes indeed it is a landform NASA has found that it is just big rocks and shadows giving an illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. As the first pics can to the internet the JPL web site revealed a natural landform and there was not a alien monument after all. And the picture acually shows Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa. These are landforms common around the American West. Yes there is theroies behind it being alien related but there is a lot of imformation that can back it up on it just being a natural landform. So I think NASA has solved the face on Mars just to be a natural landform.

Driverless cars are a thing of the future. With driverless cars one would have more time to be able to do the things they would want to do. Such things including, being able to be more involved with their family, having more leisure inside their vehicle, and the roads would be a less intense and stressful area. With driverless cars people would be able to get closer to their family on the way to a long distanced destination. One would be able to talk more with their families and learn something about their beloved family members they care so much about. The driver would be able to play games with the family like "Monopoly" or "Life" when they would not be able to before with cars that require a driver. Driverless cars would make getting kids who are being unruly to behave easier such as if a single parent wanted to get their children to behave they could just turn around and get them settled down. The driverless cars would make it possible for families to stay on the road whilst eating so they would not have to take too long of a stop and loose time on sitting down and eating at an Arby's. With the driverless cars one's trip to any destination would be more leisurely and comfortable. Driverless cars would be able to let a person who has been up all night packing fo a trip across the country, who could not book a flight for when they needed to be there, to sleep while the car drives itself while they get a nice relaxing nap or sleep. While in a driverless car one would be able to catch up on their favorite shows since they do not need their full attention on the roads they would be able to watch videos on their phone, tablet, laptop or whatever they use. Driverless cars would allot people, such as teens, to text or get on social media while in the car because they wouldn't be doing the driving. The driverless cars would make the roads a much safter and less stress inducing terrain. With the driverless cars one would stay the mandated speed limit issued by the government for protection and they would not have to suffer a ticket. The driverless car would prevent unlawful circumstances like a highspeed chase which is not only a crime of resisting arrest but it can put innoccent people in danger of getting hurt or worse. Driverless cars would likely be a catalyst in brining down accident rates since they respond to their environments and alter their pathway if something happens and it would not spin out of control since a human is not driving it. The driverless cars would make the commute to school or work or any place you need to be easier since it put a sence of stress relief from worrying about other people's driving and getting into an accident. The driverless car would all around make dirving if not your everyday life easier if the mass production of this miraclous invention were to be created. So would you help or hinder the production of this revolutionary device? For all one could know it could change the roads maybe even the world around us.

Imagine a computer that can tell if you're mad, happy, sad or confused. The Facial Acting Coding System can read your facial expressions and determine your emoitions just as a human can. The system reads the movement of your face muscles to determine how you are feeling. The main feature is that it can help in the classrom to keep kids engaged by telling if there bored or confused. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author shows the use of emotion reading technology is valuable in the classroom. The software can be extremely benificial in a classroom setting helping teachers and student adapt lesson plans to better help the student learn. With the system in your computer it can tell if you are mad or confused and can adapt the lesson to better fill the need of the individuel student. It individualizes each lesson to better fit the need of the student and to help them learn. This not only benifits the student so the lesson better fits them but helps the teacher teach in a way that gives each kid one on one attention "it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." (6) With this system in place classrooms can become more individualized and better reach each students needs while catering to the entire class rather than the individual. The System would act as a human to "preform this same impressive "calculation" everyday" like humans do everyday accessing situations. If humans use this it can better expand our knowledge of each other and how each person works. The Facial Acting Coding system not only benifits the students learning but makes the teachers teaching more effective. The use of emotional reading in the classroom is extremely valuable. The system increases the capability of the teacher and the learning of the student. With it classrooms become individually tailored without taking the time of the teacher on one kid. Every student is different and has different needs and this software can help make it to schools can better meet the needs. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author shows the use of emotion reading technology is valuable in the classroom.

In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author supports his ideas very well I say this because he is very informitive about his thoughts and facts, it's almost like if it is his dream to travel beyond Earth, and he is very passionate. The author is very imformative to support his ideas that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because in the article it says," If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to the surface?" or "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." These is some strong evidence he gives to why Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. It almost seems like if the author's big dream was to visit Venus one day because in the article it says" Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." and " Astronmers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." The author supported his idea very well that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.

Driverless cars are coming and are closer than we think. Driverless cars are a phenomenal idea becauase they're innovative,all major car compaines are moving toward the driverless way and they're safe. This essay will disscuss these three reasons on why driverless cars are a phenomenal idea. First driverless cars are overwhelmingly innovative. It states in the passage "Originally,many futurists believed the key to developing self-driving cars someday wasn't so much smarter cars as smarter roads". This is putting into perspective that even futurists didn't believe it was possible but Google has achieved this monument to perfection. Also in the ariticle it says "founder of the Google Car project, believes that the technology has finally begun to catch up to the dream". As the original founder of this project he has even reached the level of innovation that he has been striving and working for since 2009. Secondly alot of major car companies are striving for making their product driveless. For example in the passage it conveys "Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time". This is shownig how a major car company as innovative as Tesla is going to release a self driving car of their own. In that same paragraph it informs "Mercendes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020". Showing that even some of the luxury brands and the major car compaines are releasing a driverless car. Showing how they agreee with where the future is going and how much of a phenomenal idea it is. Lastly, the driverless cars are safe and take limitless precatious to stay safe. It describes in the article "Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearveiw mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor". This derscribes how many preperations is took for the car to be very safe. In conclusion I have disscussed the three reasons why self-driving cars are a good idea. The reasons eing they're innovative, major car companies are doing it and they're safe. What do you think about the cars?

Driveless cars are an object of the future that cant be avoided and will be more efficent than any manually operated vehicle. People have anticipated this idea since the cartoon the Flinstones and maybe even far before then. The thought of not putting in any effort or work to reach your destination and getting there just as safely if not safer than a person manually driving a car is amazing and something to look forward to. Safety and efficeny dont always go hand in hand but once the logistics of of speed, technology and laws are sorted out driveless cars will be more than an idea.Features that prevent wrecks, give speed limitations and alerts for drivers awareness should be confirmed before any person gets in a car and expects for it to oprate itself. Though once these features are complete "hop in and relax and let me do all the work". A problem the earth is facing is global warnming and climate change and driveless cars can change this problem and better the earth.Climate change is now seen worldwide and affecting all of nature, and the extreme every second high use of gasoline does nothing but worsen our enviornment. But these cars reduce the extreme use of gasoline.

Sometimes, it's fun to imagine that the Face on Mars is an alien artifact. However, some conspiracy theorists believe that the Face on Mars really is the work of aliens. This claim is not only outlandish, but it lacks any kind of proof to support it. The Face on Mars is just a natural landform. The fact that the Face on Mars is a natural landform has been proven by photographs taken by NASA spacecrafts. On April 5, 1998, the Mars Global Surveyor was able to take a picture of the Face on Mars, one that was much clearer than the original picture taken by the Viking in 1976. Based on the new photo, the general verdict was that the Face on Mars is just a mesa, a natural landform. To clear all dispute that the Face isn't an alien artifact, NASA took another, even clearer picture of the Face in April 8, 2001, to prove for once and for all that the Face isn't of alien origin. The picture stands as definitive proof that the Face on Mars is a natural landform. The discovery of an alien artifact on Mars would help NASA. Even if the Face on Mars was made by aliens, NASA has no reason to cover up the discovery of former alien existence on Mars. If NASA found and released the concrete evidence of an alien artifact, they would gain an increased budget and greater public rapport to find more information. It would reignite our curiosity of outer space. Therefore, discovery of an alien artifact would help NASA, not hurt them. Others say that the Face on Mars is an alien artifact that NASA is trying to hide from us. However, alien discovery would benefit NASA more than it would harm them. Furthermore, if NASA really wanted to hide the existence of a possible alien artifact, why would they show us the pictures of the Face on Mars in the first place? Coupling this reasoning with the clear pictures from NASA spacecrafts completely blows this theory out of the water. The evidence in this article prove that the Face on Mars is a natural monument, not an alien artifact. Any continued skepticism on this is unjustified and quite frankly silly. Although it is fun to imagine that the Face is alien, it is important that we know when to draw the line between imagination and a laughable statement.

I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys Program. If you think you shouldn't I will give you two very good reasons why you should. But remember it's a once in a life time thing. First of if your the kind of person that likes to save the community or help others this is the perfect job for it. If get you join the club you'll be saving lots of animals, people, plants,and habitats. The cows can be saved by building a farm. The animals like dear, wolfs, and squirrels and all the other animals can be saved by the forest. Sharks and fish and the other sea living animals can be saved by not putting polluted thing in the water. Snakes and the coyotes can be saved by helping the desert animals. Second, if your the kind of guy or women that likes to climb, or go on journeys, and swim then this also the perfect club. You'll go climb mountains and sail on huge boats and for fun catch fish. Those are the two amazing reasons now i'll see you there hope you have fun!

There are many advantages of limiting car use. Have you ever thought of just how much gas we use and how bad it is for our air. All the driving we do as teenagers is a way of showing our freedom for most, others just need a ride. I drive myself but i do have to say i couldnt give up my car, i dont live close enough to anywhere so that i could ride a bike or walk, otherwise its a great idea. Some advantages are not as much greenhouse gasses are emmitted into the air. I also see that without driving some can get more excersize that is well needed and it also gives people the chance to see the things they dont see everyday because they are in such a hurry. It can aslo help use save our resources that have been having shotages. In america not many people are worried about driving and getting thier liscences as there use to be. Another advantage is that we can save money that could be used for other things. Some places are having days rthat people cannot drive and if caught the get fined. I think its neat seein g a community coming together and doing stuff together. It shows just how are humanaty works. Anothe advantage iss that you can slow down, and see those around you that you havent seen before or in a while. I could go a day without driving, maybe even two. Could you ?

The most basic and persistant form of transportation that has been around for centuries has been the use of cars. Hundreds of thousands of people use automobiles to get to their destinations in a quicker and more efficient way. Recently, all over the world, places like Germany and Paris have been rethinking their dependency on cars. Ongoing issues regarding pollution and stress have all been traced back to using a car daily. By limiting everyday car usage, greenhouse gas emissions, constant road rage, and lack of space for other recreational purposes will decrease or even be eliminated. Pollution and global warming is a growing problem that has been affecting animals, people, and the air that we breathe. Slowly, the polluted air is becoming more and more infected. Cars and their tailpipes are a main contributor towards this issue. Studies have shown that "passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in the United States" (Rosenthal 1). The gas that is being released into the air does not have any way of being recycled. With a large amount of gas being released daily, the air can quickly become polluted with toxins and gas that normally is not used in the human body. In Paris, the intensifying smog caused a buildup of car traffic, which "rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world" (Duffer 1). Also, Paris had been found to have more smog that the other European capitals had, "[last] week Paris had 147 micrograms of pariculate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London" (Reuters 1). This was purely because of the amount of cars, scooters, and buses that Paris has roaming around the cities. The decision to ban car use for odd-numbered license plates cleared the smog that prevented the drivers from using their cars. Road rage is common in drivers that constantly have to deal with pedestrians, other cars, and the amount of traffic lights on the streets. The instinct to yell and become angered while driving has developed and grown into stress that affects an average person. Heidrun Walter, a mother of two, has ditched her car and resorted to using her own two feet as her way of transportation. Walter says "When I had a car, I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Instead of having to hear honks and beeps from incoming cars, she is surrounded by the calm streets filled with bicycles, wandering children, and the occasional automobile. Being a part of the suburban neighborhoods means that a quiet and serene environment is typical and common. Therefore, being thrusted onto the busy streets may be an enzyme to stress and road rage. Recreational areas, such as parks and shopping centers, are a way of allowing people to relax and enjoy their free time. However, buildings are being demolished to make rooms for new highways and roads to allow for more efficient ways of traveling for the excessive amount of cars that there are on the streets. There are attempts being made to "make the suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation, with less space for parking". Also, stores are beginning to be placed on a main street, instead of in shopping malls alongside highways (Rosenthal 1). These ideas take away from living spaces and create difficulty for those who want to go into a store. In Bogota, Columbia, Mayor Antanas Mockus has created a program that bans cars for the Day Without Cars. This day is part of an idea and campaign to reduce stress and air pollution. Since this day began in the mid- 1990's, "parks and sport centers have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush- hour restrictions have been dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up" (Selsky 1). Since the invention in the 1800's, cars have been depended on to take one or more people from Point A to Point B in a safe and fast way. For centuries, that has been a reasonable form of transportation. But as air pollution is increasing, drivers are becoming more angry, and land space is being taken up by new roads and streets; the idea of cars is being frowned upon. "President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from a incipient shift in American behavior..." (Rosenthal 1). Limiting car use allows for a healthier environment filled with other forms of transportation like walking, biking, and etc. Countries are beginning to form bans on cars forcing fellow citizens to lower their car usage. Last year, Bill Ford created a business plan in order to change America's way of transportation. He vowed to adjust future and current cities in which, "pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety", eventually creating a better world for generations to come.    

The author shows a lot of support for the idea that studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers in a multitude of ways some of which include interesting facts, to ways how it could be done. He even tells us in the first paragraph saying "it has proved a very challanging place to examine more closely." so it is not very easy to do but it is possibe. The author even talks about how humans have already sent numerous space craft to venus in paragraph two "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." and just a sentence after that it tells us "numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challanging planet for humans to study, despite its proxmity to us." so the author tells that us despite the issue of how dangerous it is to land there, it still tells us as readers that we are still studying it despite how much of a challange it is, and just because we are close to it doesn't make it any easier to study. In paragraph four he starts telling us why its worthy, despite how hard it is to study by saying "astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like plane in our solar system." and then continues on to say "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." so he is implying that benefits of studying Venus would be that we would be able to see if there were other life forms on the planet in the past, and that we would be able to find out what happened to the past earth like planet. The author also keeps telling us that Venus can be our nearest option for a planetary visit, so that it would be cheaper to get there and we could try to study it more without spending too much despite the dangers. Cheaper then its counterpart Mars at least. He even tells us of some ways that NASA has ideas for sending humans to Venus so that we would be able to study it without that much effort despite the dangers. The author even supports his claim in paragraph eight by saying "Striving to meet the challange 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." by saying that he tells us some of the benefits like how studying the planet has value, but he also tells us that we will likely be studying other dangerous planets and that this is just one of the many we will be studying so doing this one is no different and that it would be well worth the challange, but also the insights we would earn from the planet itself. In the next sentence he tell us that "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." the author is telling us that we should not be scared of the dangers and doubts, but that we should improve upon ourselves and shove ourselves to the edge of imagination and innovation, despite the dangers and that it is well worth the risk.

The challenging of exploring Venus. The idea of studying Venus is the dangers and worthy of it. It says that Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atomspheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Astronomers are Fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. Also Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges. Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. By the way NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of immagination and innovation. So my conclusion to this essay would have to be that the Author was trying to say that Venus is beautiful despite the dangers of it like exploring getting to know it also Venus is sometimes called the "Evening Star." I mean Venus is interesting people want to know more about the planet you could learn something new in life. They are wanting to send humans to Venus study the planet so yes it is worthy studying Venus despite the dangers of it.

Limiting car use can help us live better lives. The terrible smog that harms the environment called pollution is caused by the excessive use of vehicles in communities. I believe limiting car use can help us reduce pollution, more accessibility to public transportation, and helps you save money. Reducing the use of vehicles can help the environment. Join in and make the world a better place, literally. With less cars being used in communities the risk of pollution can be decreased. When you don't use your car you help the environment. People use cars to go to places they can easily walk to, but they don't. Some people don't even care about the environment or if they harm it. By reducing the car use in many communities pollution can be greatly reduced. Public transportation is cheap and quick. Using more public transportation helps you save money and helps the environment. Pollution can be reduced by just taking the bus instead of your own car. According to "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky more people tend to get the initiative to take public transportation. You don't have to do something extraordinary to help the environment, maybe all you need to do is take the bus. People tend to buy less cars if you limit car usage. The less cars you buy means the more money you save. According to "The End of Car Culture" by Elisabeth Rosenthal a study found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. The people who drove less between that time must have saved alot of money on gasoline. When you don't use your car as much it ends up benefiting everybody. By limiting the useage of cars the environment benefits a great deal. Pollution can be reduced to a point where it causes minimal harm if everybody decides to pitch in. Transportation will recieve more funding. You will be able to save plenty of money on gas and use it for whatever other purpose you may need it. In conclusion, car useage should be reduced so that everyone may benefit from it.

Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size. Venus is a planet in the solar system, it is the second planet from the sun. It has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely. Venus is often referred to as Earth's twin, Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planetory neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds. a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfric acid in venus's atmosphere. The difference in speed means that sometimes we are closer to mars and other times to venus. Because Venus is something right around the corner in the space terms human have sent numerous space craft to land on the cloud-draped world. No space craft survived the landing for more than hours. Beyond high pressure and heat, venusian geology and weather present earthquakes, amd frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on it's surface. Venus has the hotest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though mercury is closer to our sun. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particular compelling idea for sending human to study venus. NASA's posible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the frays. Srriving to meet our challenge presented by venus has a big value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human currosity will likely lead us into manequally.

An unusual face was spotted by Viking 1 in 1976. Looking at evidence that were provided, it shows that the "unusual face" found on Mars was just a mistake. Even though they had picture of the unusual face the first time they spotted, it was a really blurry one so it created illusions for people to make it look like there was actually a face on there. It was later proven by Mars Global Surveyor that it was just a natural landform on Mars using photography. Therefore, pictures don't lie which makes the "unusual face" just another natural landform. In 1998, the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia, where the unusual face was found, to snap a picture of the unusual face which was ten times sharper than the Viking photos. Since the picture was pretty clear, it reveal what was actually there on Mar's surface. It proved that it was just a natural landform and that it wasn't any alien monument. People may say that since it's winter it was the cloudy time to of the year of for Mars so other things such as clouds could've had an effect on the picture but it doesn't change the fact that it's just a landform no matter how unsatified the people were. In addition, NASA unveiled the image saying that it was just a huge rock formation. They noted that it resembles a human head because of the shadows. It was creating illusions for human eyes so they didn't see the actual object but instead they saw a face on Mars. Although, some scientists believed that the face was an alien artifact which was what got Mars Glbal Surveyor to even begin taking pictures of Mars to prove that it was just a natural landform. Overall, the face on Mars is just an illusion even though some people believe it's real. However, people might think it's real. Looking at the evidence provided by the Vikings which was the first photo of the face on Mars, it really resembled an Egyptian Pharaoh. Even a few scientist believed that it was an alien artifact and it even became a pop icon. It was starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines and radio talk shows which mean people actually believed it. The face on Mars attracted many people's attention. Which is why people could say it's real since the majority believes it but what really matter is how it's proven. It was proven using a camera that snap pictures clearly. Everyone was later informed that it was just a natural landformed because of the picture taken in 2001. In conclusion, the face found on Mars was just a natural landform that looked like a face because of a blurry picture taken by the Vikings in 1976. Many scientists and people believed that it was real but it was just an illusion to the human eyes. In 2001, Marlin's team took a snap of the face on Mars which prove that it was just a natural landform. Garvin compared it to the landforms on Earth so that people could understand and believe that it was just a natural landform. Therefore, the picture taken in 2001 was an evidence that proved that the unusual face found on Mars was just a natural landform.

There are several advantages of limiting car usgae. A couple of them are that there would be less pollution in the air and that communities would be set up different to make it easier to get to places without having to drive to these place you could just walk instead. One advantage of limiting car usage is that there would be less pollution. Source 4 says, "If the pattern persits- and many sociologists believe it will- it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions." This shows that if you cut out some of your car usage there will be less carbon in the air. Which would lead to less pollution and a better living environment for everybody. Source 3 says, "It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." The person who said this was talking about the car free day that occurs in Colombia. Going just one day without your car can have an impact on the carbon emissions and help bring down the amount of air pollution in that area. Another advantage of limiting car usage is new community set ups. Source 1 says, "But it's basic percepts are being adopted around the world in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation, with less space for parking. In this new approach, stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway." This shows that the government is willing to set up the community in a different way to limit the amount of car usage on a daily basis. Which also makes your shopping trips more convinant because the stores you need or want to go to are walking distance from your house. Source 3 says, "Parks and sports cneters also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been repalced by broad smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new resturants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up. This explains how the city is being remodeled to help encourage people to start using their cars less and to be able to walk to many places instead of driving there by bringing these places closer to their houses. There are several advantages of limiting car usgae. A couple of them are that there would be less pollution in the air and that communities would be set up different to make it easier to get to places without having to drive to these place you could just walk instead. There are several advantages of limiting car usage. A couple of them are less pollution and new community set ups.

Luke bomberger was just a normal high school graduate, Until his friend Don Reist asked him to go with him to Europe on a cattle boat. He was just given the opportunity of a lifetime. Luke and his friend Don had reasons to sign up for being a " Seagoing cowboy". World war II had now ended and many countries were left destroyed, to help the countries recover from war they will need things such as food, animals, and many other things. To help the people in those countries 44 nations united to form a group called UNRRA ( the united nations relief and rehabilitation administration). The " Seagoing Cowboys" were hired to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped over seas. In August 1945, they got orders to report to New Orleans. Luke and his friend arrived on August 14th, the same day the Pacific war ended. There was 335 horses to take care of. Before arriving in Greece Luke turned 18, which means that he is now eligable to be drafted for the military service. In 1947 Luke had made nine trips, more than any seagoing cowboy. Luke ended up touring many places around the world. Luke was doing his job chcking on the animals, but this time was different it was raining, Luke accidentally slid down a ladder and almost fell into the deep dark ocean but a piece of metal stopped him fromm falling. Luke was lucky to be alive but he still was injured with some cracked ribs. Although it wasn't always fun, Luke found things to do like baseball, volleyball, tennis, and many more things. Luke had an amazing adventure being a Seagoing Cowboy, he discovered the world and was given a once in a lifetime opportunity.

While being able to tell someone's emotions can be a benefitial factor, it is also an invasion of the person's privacy. Many positive ideas come with being able to see how someone is feeling in a classroom, but there are some emotions that people just don't want other people knowing about. There are many different thoughts that go through a human being's head that therefore create the emotions that are felt. Students knowing that a computure is reading their every emotional status can create a very tense feeling and that could effect how the class lesson flows. There is no value in being ale to tell how a group of students are feeling in a class room. Negative emotions are everywhere, which means anything can happen to anybody, so people can be emotionaly unstable. If a group of students in a classroom were to know that there is a computure that is telling the instructor that there is something wrong with a specific student, it can be imbarrasing. In the text it states " imagine being able to detect exactly how other people are feeling, even when they are trying to hide their emotion." That statement is an correct example of why computures that read emotions would be an invasion of every student's privacy. It's also justifying reason that there is no value in being able to tell how students are feeling because it is uncalled for. The ariticle goes into futher explaining of how the new software in these computures are helpful and benefitial. Although it might be helpful in other ways than in a classroom, it shouldn't be used to collect information on how people are emotionally feeling without permission. Even with permission, emotions are a valuable part of humans that shouldn. t be taken for granted and used to collect data or research. For the value of emotions would be lost if a computure is using a software that reads the emotional status of the students in a classroom.

Dear senator of Florida, I am writing an argument in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States.  I feel that you should make it more clear to the people that vote.  The people should know who and what they are voting for, which some people get confused.  "...sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate? Sometimes..."  If people keep voting for the wrong candidate soon they will realize and the senator of Florida will be recieving more than one letter.  With the electora doing a "winner-take-all" system then, its not really fair to the people. Every state in the United States should absolutely get a chance to see a single campaign ad.  "...seventeen states didnt see the candidates at all,including Rhode Island and South Carolina..."  I dont think you should abolish the electoral college, after all its not so bad.  You should just do better and get all around the United States not just a couple of states, ALL!! Sincerly, PROPER_NAME

Why should we study the Venus as a worthy pursuit? going to Venus we will discover a lot of new things that we didn't know about. When going to Venus you can give away the curiosity's that people may have on the planet. But going to Venus could be a risk factor or it can be something that we discover and put it on earth. In the passage the author states that traviling to Veuins is going to be a challenge but is still wanting to make a pursuit to go. In paragraph five the author states that ''(NASA) has one particularly compeling idea for sending humans to study Venus''. The author states NASA to show that a very big company wants to know what is up in Venus, so it should be studieded. In paragraph eight the author states that ''Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has valued, not only because of the insights to be gained on the planet itself''. This shows that the author says taking a challnge is a good thing when you want to find something out, so take challenges. In paragrqph four the author says ''If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientist even disscusing further visits to its surface''. The author uses this to ask a question to have you thinking to show that even scientist are curious about the planet Venus and the readers should be to. In paragraph one the author explains what other people think about they say that Venus is a evening star so the author is saying that there are miths about Venus, so the author trys to explain that traviling to Venus will take away the curiositys so, it might be a new way to discover new things to bring back to earth to share with the world; because it can advance things. The author uses alot of questions to show what he is refering to with traviling to Venus and making the reader aprove with his oppinion. In paragraph seven he states that ''some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simbulating the chaos of Venus surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. This shows that NASA was conducting experiments where a computer can take such bad climate. The author uses alot of questions to show that what they are talking about is true and they even had evidence to support there idea. They even used other researchers oppinons like NASA and other scientist to show that they are also on the authors side so should Venus be traviled?.

In the article it says that technology can now read the expression of a person using a software called " the Facial Action Coding System". I think this would be valuable in a classroom because it can read when a student is bored or confused and when it reads that the computer would modify the lesson like a human teacher would. The FACS would also help understand how the student is feeling in the classroom. It could aslo help in many ways by understanding how the students feel about like a lesson that is given or feel throughout the whole classroom time. There is pros and cons to this, the pros are that the computer would be able to a students feelings. Facs would also be able to help out the student if the student is confused during the lesson and would be able to modify it for them. The cons is that the Facs software might also not work at time by reading thier correct emotions.

There are two different optionss that could take place when deciding my opinion on driverless cars. I am against driverless cars, for a numerous amount of reasons. So many things could go wrong when having driverless cars around. Car accidents occur every single day, and I don't believe that driverless cars would help this cause. People need to be more aware of their surroundings and pay a lot more attention to the roads when driving. Just like every type of technology today, it's highly possible that these driverless cars won't work properly and malfunction. Driverless cars could ruin our world and harm our lives in so many different ways. Today's current drivers and cars, already cause car accidents and harm to everyone's lives. If our society were to add driverless cars into the mix, it would be chaos. More people would be getting car wrecks, because they would have a reason to text, eat, talk, and even sleep while driving. These people won't realize that the driverless cars won't work 100%. It is possible that the sensors will not work, and that it is all on them to be aware of their surroundings and be alert to steer the car in the right direction. Any laws against texting and driving, would not help to stop this, because people do not always listen. Almost anywhere, texting and driving is illegal, but even today, I still see people going agaisnt these laws, and causing themselves to get in a crash. Driverless cars will all be going at different speeds, therefore, making everyone more prone to getting into an accident. If these driverless cars were to all go at the exact same speed, it could cause people to be late to certain events. Driverless cars would have so many components to them that they would need to work, so that means that they would use up more energy/fuel. If the driverless cars would need more gas, then that means that gas would be more expensive, which is a huge downside for people. Even now, we are not sure whether these driverless cars would actually work or not, but we also are not sure that if these cars did work, that they will work properly. It is very possible that these cars could malfunction and make the possibility even higher that someone could get into a car accident. There are so many factors that could cause car accidents, when it comes to driverless cars. Today, we already have so many things that could cause people to get into car wrecks, and driverless cars would add to that. Overall, there are so many factors that could cause car wrecks and accidents, and make everyone question the safety of our people. People should be more alert and aware of their surroundings to prevent car accidents. Driverless cars and their speeds may affect our daily lives, and we are not sure if these cars would actually work.

In todays world things have evolved so much that now we even have driverless cars. In my opinion, I am not in favor of driverless cars. There are many issues that come about when talking about driverless cars. Some issues would include, the age of legal drivers, the liability, and whether or not the drivers has to pay attention or not. All of these issues can be explained throughout this paper. Today the age that a driver gets their license is 16 years old. With driverless cars, the legal age of drivers would probably be lowered. This could even be lowered to the age of young children. I believe it is an awesome opportunity to be able to drive. Since the car is driverless, would drivers still need to go through traning like there is now? If there wasn't any training and the car would malfunction and the driver had to take control, then the driver behind the wheel would not know what to do. The article says, "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash, but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigting through roadwork or accidents." Even if cars become totally driverless, will they actually know right away when an accident has occured in front of them? Another issue that could come up with driverless cars is, the liability. Who's fault is it? Today there are laws that decide who is at fault in a car accident. If the cars were totally driverless then there would be no need to focus on the road and the driver could be doing whatever they wanted. What would happen if there was a constuction zone ahead and the driverless car didn't know and kept driving and hit someone or something, would the accident be the drivers fault or the manufacturers? " If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the naufacturer?" I'm sure there are many manufacturers who would not like all of the liability to fall back on them. That could end up costing them more money than what they are getting from the driverless cars. If it is the drivers fault then they could just say that they were told they didn't need to pay attention and they could sue the manufacturer. The last issue that comes to mind is, does the driver need to pay attention if the car is totally driverless? I think that the real attention getter with driverless cars is that the driver wouldn't have to watch the road and could be doing stuff with the passengers in the back seat. The only problem with this is, is the car fully able to correctly drive itself through traffic and dangerous situations or does someone need to pay attention the whole time? If they could fully promise drivers that the car is capable of driving through any situation then it would be okay. I do think that eventually cars will be driverless, but I think that manufacturers and law enforcers need to take a little bit more time developing ways that these problems can be fixed. "Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020." They need to stop and think about how they can fix the problems such as, they age of legal drivers, the liability, and whether or not a driver needs to pay attention at all times. Once this is all cleared up then I will fully be for driverless cars.

The developement of driverless cars is an important, and significant technological milestone. Driverless cars are a perfect example of how well we have devoloped sensory, atomotive, and GPS systems. They also have extraordinary potential to make travel safer, and more efficient. They could prevent countless deaths or injuries because the majority of all car accidents are caused by human error, a driverless car would never make decisions out of haste or excitement. Instead cars would travel consistantly and safely. The developement of driverless cars could lead to several significant technological advances. Innovations inspired by driverless cars could lead to safer, or more efficient vehicles. At the same time, developing driverless cars could lead to significant inventions. Driverless cars are the solution to the biggest cause of car accidents, human error. Thousands of car accidents are caused as a result of poor, or impaired judgement. If cars could drive themselves, this problem would be effectively eliminated. A driverless car would never make the decision to speed or run a red light. In addition to being a safer alternative to human driven vehicles, driverless cars could also be more efficient. Driverless cars would never get lost because of their advanced GPS systems. They would also take the fastest, and safest routes. Driverless cars would rarely run out of gas because they would alwas be aware of the nearest gas station, and how much gas is in their tank. In conclusion, Driverless cars should be fully developed, and manufactured for public use because they are a safer alternative to human driven cars. They are more efficient, as well. Also because the developement of driverless cars would be a significant technological milestone, and they could lead to newer better tachnologies.

I crossed the Atlantic Ocean over ten times. I crossed the Pacific twice to help people who were struggling from World War II. The article "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves" writtten by Peggy Reif Miller was not only a story for encouraging people who are down and need to do something, but it also gives the main charcter's point of veiw too. Miller tells us how daring the adventure can be over seas, but what I tell is totally different. When I was over seas I saw many beautiful things. Miller may thought it was scary, but I assure you it is not. When I was out of high-school I was working two jobs. I worked at a grocery store and at a bank. Then my friend Don Reist gave me a call asking if I wanted to go to Europe on a cattle boat. It was an opportunity of a life time. I said yes. It was 1945 and as you know World War II was going on. In August 1945, I received orders to report to New Orleans. We arrived the 14 of August, the day the Pacific War ended. I turned 18 before arriving in Greece. I could become apart of the army. The board saw I was apart of the cattle-boat trip. So they told me to stay on it. I was fine with it. By the time I discharged in 1947, I made nine trips. The most of any Seagoing Cowboy. Maybe one day you could become the Seagoing Cowboy to make the most trips. Maybe you could become apart of the army. If you become apart of the Seagoing Cowboy you can accomplish many things. I told you it's not scary. Your making exhilerating things happen. The cattle-boats were an unbelievable opportunity for me. Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. Seeing the Acropolis was very special though. I also toured an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China. It was extrordinary! I was done with the tours and we were crossing the Atlantic from the easten coast to the United States of America. I was on duty of cleaning stalls and feeding the animals. I was watch man for one night. I was making my report to captain when I slipped on the ladder. I most fell into sea, but I recovered. I had a few cracked ribs, but I was fine. I had time to have fun on board. I played many games with my friends. Some games we played were volleyball, table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, and whittling. A Seagoing Cowboy kind of sounds fun now doesn't it. You could have so much fun with your friends and other new people. You can have fun with the animals. The big part of being a Seagoing Cowboys is getting to say this, "I'm grateful for the opportunity. It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." This awareness stayed with me. So you got the point of veiw from other people like Miller and people who don't like the army, but now you got my point of veiw. People think it's scary or dangerous. Yes, it's dangerous, but fun. Not only do you get to help people, but you get to see amazing veiws and you get to encourage other people to do great things. I've crossed the Atlantic Ocean over ten times, I've crossed the Pacific twice. Can you do the same or something even better?

Who knew that a planet referred to as Earth's "twin" could possibly provide so many unknowns to humans? Venus is the second planet in our solar system and is the "closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too". Venus has a more harsh environment than Earth. With a surface temperature of over 800 degrees, and a thick atmosphere of nearly 97 percent carbon, Venus is not tolerable for humans. Despite these presented dangers, the author of the article suggests that studying Venus is worth the risks. The author of the article mentions clearly in paragraph three the intolerable living conditions of the planet Venus. Although the author has knowledge of these dangers, they claim that studying the Earth-like planet is worth it. In order to back up their claim, the author provides facts in the texts to convince the reader of the following: "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." This excerpt for example, may cause the reader to make inferences about other similarities between Earth and Venus, and would spark more interest in learning about Venus. In addition to similar physical features, the author mentions how Venus is "our nearest option for planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." This is a very vital fact, and significantly backs up the authors claim. Many planets and stars are several hundred light years away, making space travel and new discoveries by humans difficult. The closeness of Venus would allow humans to visit Venus, if there was a safe way to get there. Leading off of the previous statement, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been formulating a solution to "the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus... Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape". This would allow scientist to get extremely close to the surface of Venus, yet not close enough to gather samples from the planet itself. The author of the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author was able to effectively support the idea that studying Venus is worth the risk, as it is the nearest planet to visit, as well as the idea of a blimp-like vehicle allowing close access to the planet to make new scientific discoveries. Despite the dangerous temperatures, and atmosphere composed of nearly 97 percent carbon dioxide, the author provided many examples as to why studying Venus is worth the risk to make new discoveries, and gather beneficial information about Earth's so- called "twin".

Humans have a interesting way living in today`s society because we have advanced technology like cars. Just because people have cars the usage should still be limited. When it comes to limiting car usage people have lots of advantages. To begin with, in the passage "in german suburb, llife goes on without cars" ms. rosenthal clearly states that 70% of Vauban`s families dont have cars. They think that this is less tense without one. But not only that. 5,500 residents within a rectanglar square mile may be the most advanced expirement iun low-car surburban life. even in "paris bans driving due to smog" they think the driving should be limited. the smog was intensive for five days. as a statement was said in passage three 'it is a good way to take away stress. so leaving that in mind it could still effect car usage positively. secondly, in the last passage ms. rosenthal says "obamas gaol about the green house gas will be asisted so thats meaning the people will need to limit their car usage or he will. as a population the worlds usage is slowly but surely decreasing. in the passage it says americans couldnnt afford cars so that alont is assiting the limiting car usage. the numer of cars driven was 9% below nor so that was a huge win for the limiting car usage car usage should be be limited because of many reasons. so i propose a law to all of man kind that car usage should be limited for the better of the eniorment and for all people.

The Value of Students Emotions I'm going to be talking about the technology that is able to read the emotional expressions on peoples faces. I don't think it's important for them to get that technology in class rooms. I'm going to be listing off ideas on why I think its not important for schools to get this technology. My first topic is going to be about how teachers are really interested in how the students feel about what they are learing. My second topic is going to be about how students usually give there opion on how they feel about there learning. My third topic is going to be about how they could use the money for something else other than that technology. My first topic is teachers don't really care about how students feel about what are learning. What I mean by that is teachers don't care if the students like the topic are they just care about if the students are learning and understanding. Sometimes teachers can tell by students faces if they're liking the topic or not. Sometimes teacher will ask the students if they like the topic or not but they don't really care if they do. So then like what's the point in spending money on something like that. Usually students will give their opion on the topic. I know I give my opion and I know other students to do to. Students don't want their faces to be scanned and told how they are feeling. I know I wouldn't want mine scanned. Everybody knows how they feel at school even teachers know how students feel at school. Sometimes teachers will ask the students how they feel at school and people will tell them the truth. Schools could use the money for something else other than a face scanner. They could use the money for things that need fixed in the school. Like the roof it's been leeking they could fix that. Buy new things for the P.E. classes like balls or rackets. They could use the money to fix the cafetiera or buy new books with the money. They could spend the money on fixing the bathrooms or the lockers things like that is what they could spend there money on. This is why I think they should not buy the scanner. I know it sounds cool and everything but I think it would not be a good idea to buy. It would be very awkward to up to a students face and just scan it during class. People won't like that I know I won't like that. It would also be a waste of time because what if just stopped working you would have to fix it or it stopped working all the time it would take a long time to fix.

In Vauban, Germany many people have given up thier cars. Residents saying that they find that there are many advantages to not owning a car. Such as reducing the gas emissions from tailpipes, saving money, and being much happier. For instance, an advantage of not having a car is a decrease in gas emission. In the article "Car Free Cities"  its sites "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50 percent in the United Stated." This shows that cars are infecting our greenhouses with gases and potentionaly harming us. Furthermore, not owning a car will save you money. In the article it states "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park-large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home." That statement shows that it's not really reasonable to own a car when you have to pay to park. Lastly, people in the article say they are much happier after they sold thier car to live there. There a woman named Heidrun Walter who says "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." this statement shows that residents of Vauban like separating suburban life from auto use. To conclude, there are many reasons why the residents of Vauban, Germany have given up there cars. They benefit from many advantages such as reduced gas emissions, saving money, and being much happier in their life. in the end there many advantages to living in Vauban.

A Helpful Change in Your Lifestyle Can you tell the air feels different? Over the past years some countries have put restirctions on car usage. Although this may sound extremely crazy to some, most individuals accept the new law's for car's. Motorized vehicles have put a tole on our environment, our well being, and our wallets. By certain countries banning the use of motorized vehicles it has allowed individuals stress level to decrease, lowered air pollution, and increase money that citizens have. Gas cars that create pollution are a thing of the past, we are moving to electric cars, bicycles, and more; the future is changing and its for our own benefits. Cars are one of the main sources for people's stress, whether it be because of car failures, others who annoy you while you drive, or the fact you can never find a parking spot.  Heidrun Walter claims " When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much mappier this way ( In German suburb, Life goes on without Cars 3)." One main reason people are less tense and stress is because people do not have to constantly worry about if another car is about to hit them, if traffic is going to be to slow to get to work, or if your car is going to breakdown on you. Car's create unwanted stress that can be easily avoided. Indeed life would be very different without cars people in Bogota, Paris, and Germany have all been able to function properly without motorized vehicles.  In fact "70 percdent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold cars to move her (In German Suburbs, Life goes on without Cars 3)." These individuals have proven that it is okay to make a switch. In order for you to reduce stress in your life, you have to take away the source of stress, and that is what citizens have done, and without cars majority of people are happier and healthier. Due to citizen's of Bogota, Paris, and Germany not using cars and having to switch to bikes, walking, and electric bikes; has greatly reduced toxic gases in the environment. Due to individulas in Paris not excessively using cars the amount of smog has reduced. According to Robert Duffer " after days of near-record pollutions, paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city( Paris bans driving due to smog 10)." Paris has enforced strict rules that rejects people from driving, also a switch to diesel fuels. In return these ideas have lowered the level of smog in Paris creating a cleaner environment for the citizen. Not only has Paris help reduce toxic gases from entering our environment, but so has Bogota. In the article Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota, Andrew Selsky stated that this has been Bogota's "thrid year straight that cars have been banned for one day" and the only motorized vehicles they have used are "buses". This switched has dramatically cut traffic, rush hour, and the amount of smog left in the air. Although there is still traces of pollution after this day it has lowered. The reasons are simple, using less cars makes less gases, also those who go the day without using cars may like the change better and permantely switch to a lifestyle without cars. Another thing that has been changed due to the limitation of car usages is that with individuals not having to buy a car, pay for insurance, and pay for gas, it  has increased the amount of money citizens have in their wallets. Citizens of the United States of America have not exactly chosen to not use cars, but some have, the main reason Citizen of America have limited themself is due to a lack of money. During our "recession" Americans were "unemployed" and "unable to pay (The end of car culture 32)." Because citizens were not able to pay for cars, they did not use them, thus as you get adapted to a new situation you tend to stay with it. After the switch citizens who chose to continue a life without a car, were able to have more money because they didnt have to pay for the cost that come with a car. Now some citizens have made the switch to not using motorized vehicles, which has helped increase the amount of money citizens have, which is always an advantage because you are able to pay for other things that are neccasary to your life. Although cars seem like a material object that is so precious to life, it's not. In all reality people can live a life without cars, citizens in Bogota, Paris, and Germany have, and they enjoy it. Its time to make a switch and make a helpful change in your lifestyle. A life without cars is very benefitial, it is less stressful, lowers pollution, and has an increases of money. Although not using cars is a bit extreme, you can always make a better switch to using electric products, which can also help lower the amount of toxic gases in the air. Gas car's that produce extreme levels of gases are a thing of the past, I believe its time to move to the future.  

The face is actually not a natural landform because as you see in paragraph 3 it says "A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see.The caption noted a 'Huge rock formation. . . which resemles a human head . . . formed by shawdows giving the illusion of eyes,nose,and mouth." The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attention to mars. In paragraph 5 it says The "Face on Mars"has since become a pop icon.it has starred in hollywood film, appeared in book,magazines,radio talk shoes ,even haunted grocery store chechout 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. Paragraph 3 talks about how 25 years ago something funny happened around mars which was the face that actually appeared on mars. NASA viking 1 spacecraft was circling the planet snapping photos of possilbe landing sites for its sister ship viking 2 when it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face an enormous head nearly 2 miles from end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the red planet called cydonia. On the left here it shows pictures of the face that appeared on mars it shows 3 different pictures from (1976)(1998)(2001) side by side a viking 1 phonto from 1976 a mars global survey image from1998 and the latest image from 2001,theres another photo after paragraph 5 and it's a 1976 1 photograph of the face on mars. Also in paragraph 8 it says but not eveyone was satisfied. the face on mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in april '98 a cloudy time of year on the red planet.the camera on board images had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face perhaps said skeptics alien markings were hidden by haze. In paragraph 9 it says mission controllers prepared to look again it's not easy to target cydonia says garvin in fact it hard work.

Would you be against or for the use of technology to claim emotional expressiosn? Many people will go for it and many will go against it, it really depends on how you look at it. There are plenty of supporting examples that you can use wheter you are for or against it. For me I do not like the use of this technology. I do not like the idea of the use of this technology. For one reason this could be way inncorect and give you false information. It is most likely that this technolgy will not be all the way correct. Based on looks you cannot tell what percent is sad, angry,happy, or fearful. Also, like the passage said in paragraph seven the steps "While looking in the mirror." Just one slight expression on your face can change the percents. So, if you smile and your not happy there will be more percent happy than you really are. Many people cover up sadness or being angry by smiling. So if they smile the technology will be incorrect. That smile could change a lot of the percents. The only one who knows how happy, angry, or sad you are is yourself. You may be able to cover up all the sadness in your life by smiling and not being down, even though you really are. Therefore thoes are just a few of my reasons that I don't like the technology. One expression could change how the results come back. Also, there is no way the test could be all the way correct. Whether you ar efor it or against it, I just don't think this is how to figure out how you are feeling. Like I said earlier in the essay the only one who knows how you are feeling is you.

Some people think that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. Just imagine how can an alien race that may or may not be exdinct, built something like the Face on Mars. Hear me out on this one, but what if the Face on Mars was just an natural landform? Let's think about for a minute and see what can come up with. Let's delve deeper into this interesting idea, shall we? Now what if the Face on Mars was a natural landform? "We photographed the Face as soon we could get a good shot at it." (6). My evidence is the structure itself, maybe it just looks like a face, who knows! We believed maybe because it looks like a face, aliens created it. Let me give you more evidence. Aliens has been a man's fantasy forever. Do we know that that aliens really do exist? Ever since the first man on the moon, sciencists have been working to prove that aliens exist. We barely have enough evidence to even prove ourselves. Do we humans have enough evidence that shows aliens are real? No, we dont have enough evidence that shows aliens are real. Maybe one one day we may or may not find an alien race on a farway planet. Until then, we just have to more evidence that proves it. Who knows, maybe aliens did created the Face on Mars? My conclusion is that the Face on Mars is a natural landform.

Driverless cars should be continued. Driverless cars should be continued because we have developed so much new and imporves stuff compared to what we had in the 1900's. In the 1900's I'm sure people were scared for the development of cars thinking of malfunctions, but cars turned out to be a great help for time. I also believe that these smart cars could help us get a new, imporved road system. Time is limited. Let's say if you have a Family gathering to get to and you live in Indiana, but your family lives in California. You don't want to show up and be unrested and not be able to spend time with your family. You want to get sleep. These smart cars are a grea way for that. It's an auto pilot for cars. In the early 1900's the car was invented, thinking back they used horses. I'm sure people were terrified of the thought of the car. It has helped improve so many things for us. It makes our schedules more flexible, it gets us there fast and doesn't wear us out. If we could sleep while driving there would be so many more possibilities, we could leave at 9:00 expecting to arrive at 12:00, if we take a nap onm the way we could be there so quick and be energized for the rest of the day. These reasons support my choice of continuing the development of smart cars.

Being a seagoing cowboy is oppertonity of a lofe time. Read my three reasons why you should be a seagoing cowbaoy. You can help people in need. Like giving them food taking them to medical attetion if needed. Plus helping people is the greatest feeling in the world. Like even the little stuff like helpin an elder walk across the street picking someones books up. Just help people in need every day. You get to see and meet new people every day. Becomig friends with someone is the most wonderful thing. Helping some one in need then becoming there friend is great. You can learn new cultures in making friends. Just be nice to friend and people you don't know. You get to see expirence new things. You can see things you proably never heard of. You can see the been in chicago. You could see one of the temples in greece. Just go out there and do somthing diffiernt. Being a seagoing cowboy is just a different thing to do. If you like helping people this for you. If like going out and making new friends then be a seagoing cowboy. If you like seeing new things and adventure you would be pefect. So it is now your dission to be a sea going cowboy if you like to do all these things this is for you.

Using this new Facial Action Coding System in a classroom would be a valuable asset for understanding how students feel during a lesson. Students will often start to feel boredom or confusion and the facial recognition system will be able to pick up on those emotions. With this information given to teachers, they can change their lesson to make it more meaningful to those students who feel emotions like boredom or confusion. There are many possibilities with this technology when it comes to understanding how students truly feel through out the school day. The Facial Action Coding System uses a serious of percents to show how a person is feeling. For example, the famous "Mona Lisa" painting displays eighty-three percent of happiness, nine percent of disgust, six percent of fear, and two percent of anger(D'Alto, Nick). If this technology is applied to students, then teachers can finally understand how each and every student feels during their class period. Teachers would also be able to recognize if someone may be overly sad or angry. This could enable students to receive help faster from a counselor or parent if they are depressed or anger over something. Understanding is a student is depressed with this new technology could save so many lives due to the fact that teen suicide rates are higher now than they ever have been. With the new rise of facial recognition software, it can be used in the classroom to help teachers identify how students are really feeling in their classroom. The system could be used to determine if a lesson is confusing or boring a student, which helps the teacher know how they could change up their lesson plan. It may also be used to save lives by recognizing a student who is depressed so that they can get help as soon as possible. To finalize everything, this new technology would be extremely useful for both the teacher and the student in identifying true emotions throughout the school day.

Dear state senator , Despite some of the risky things that can come along with Electoral College voting ,voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election .Some people therfore think it is useful and some on the other hand think that it is unfair and that it should be changed . Fortuatntly though one thing that a Electoral College can promise you is a certainty of outcome. A dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is possible. It happened in 2000 but it is less likely than a dispute over the poppular vote . For exmaple in 2012's election with Obama and Romney , Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney. Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner -take-all basis , even a very slight plurality in a state creates a big elecoral - vote victory . Moving right along , the Electoral college also can aviod Run - Off elections . The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate recieves a majority of the votes cast . For instnace , Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes while winning a majority in the electoral college . That situation then creates pressure which would greatly complicate the presidential election process, is reduced by the Electoral college. Therefore ,there would be  a clear winner .         

why visiting venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger, the planet might have once had life, to gather info on venus to know it better, to satisfy peoples curiosity. the planet might have had life before due to that it is earth like when it comes to terrian, " Today venus still has some features that are analogous to those on earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sedimrnt and includes familiar features such as valllys, mountains, and craters." to gather info on the palnet, is to understand our history more, " Many researchers are working on inovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of venus." to satisy peoples curiosity is to satisfy the search for meaning, " Striving to meet the challange presented by venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity would likely lead us into many equally intimadating endeavours." the possiblity of venus having life, gathering info on venus to learn about it, and to satisfy our curiosity, is why exploring venus is worth the danger.

The author uses many details to support their idea that Venus has value. They state that Venus is referred to as Earth's "twin" and that it is the closest to Earth when it comes to density and size. I believe this supports the claim because it means that it is fairly close and could be easily acessed for research. The author also explains that people have sent spacecraft to land on Venus, but the missions were not completed since the crafts did not last very long. This supports the idea that there is not a lot known about Venus. It is said that the atmosphere is made up of nearly 97% carbon dioxide, and is covered with clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid, and that the surface of the planet averages over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. This tells us that Venus may not be the ideal place for human life, but still has plenty of value when it comes to research. The article tells us that it may have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, and that it once may have been covered by large oceans and could have possibly supported life at one time. Venus still has some features that are similar to Earth such as valleys and mountains. It also states that it is sometimes our nearest option for a planetary visit. NASA has developed an idea for sending humans to study Venus. they suggest floating above the hostile conditions, but that would make it difficult to gather samples from the ground. We are told that scientists are creating new and innovative electronics and machines to help us get a better understanding of the planet. This gives us hope that there will be a solution if we need to stay above the ground to study Venus.The author explains to us that NASA is working on more devices and even going back to some simplified electronics. I believe they explain this to show that there are still many possibilities when it comes to electronic devices for research. The author states that Venus has value because of the insight to be gained from researching it, but the author also states that human curiousity will likely lead us to equally dangerous places, and that our travels should not be limited by dangers and doubts. I believe that this statement is true and helps support their claim because if we let ourselves be consumed by fear and doubt, nothing would ever be accomplished.

I believe the Face on Mars is just a natural landform. There can be no possible way for there to be aliens on Mars. In paragraph twelve, Garvin states that the Face on Mars reminds him of a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. This Face is unusual, but there are outlines and some other formations on planets that are more different than this. In paragraph seven, on April 5, 1998, there was another Face on Mars. A JPL website revealed that there was no alien monument at all. It was just a natural landform. Only conspiracy theorists state that aliens made the Face on Mars. They don't have the right technology to state that this theory is actually true. Only NASA has the right technology to research this Face and can tell whether this is true. In paragraph seven, because the other Face on Mars have been proven to actually be a natural landform, what makes the other face any different? Aliens have not been proven real at all. So what makes aliens want to make a face on Mars? Even if aliens were real, they wouldn't make any face on Mars. They would make something more complicated. In conclusion, the Face on Mars is not made by any aliens at all. Instead, it is a natural landform that probably was made by an asteroid or a meteor that was floating around in space. In paragraph eleven, it states that 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.

Have you ever wanted to travel fun places like cross countries going to china or go to what ever country you wanted. Well there is a book about cowboys that cross crountries and lived there. Luke wants you to join the cowboy travel I know that luke wants to have fun. Luke Bomberguer had no idea that his life would change soon after his high school graduation. I think you should follow the cowboys because he just experiance many new fun things. He got to travel all the way to Europe and China. Wouldn't you wnat to travel chase your dreams and have fun. Lukes friend ask him did he want to and luke said yes , if you have job and you want to take a break then go with the cowboy and see how much fun you have. In August 14 they recived to report to New Oreans. The cattle boat trips are unbelieveable said luke. A opportunnity for a small town boy luke said again he had the side benfit of seeing Europe and china. I think you should do what ever you want. If you want to chase your dream you can do it. Hard work pays off luke did a 2 time part job. After that he got to go to many places and the most biggest is going to China and Europe. If you want it people you can do it.

Out of all the plants in the universe, I didn't think that there was going to be another "Earth." Many perople are scraed to travel out side of earth. I would also be scared. There is one " Earth-like " planet. Venus has very dangerous charateristics. Venus is the closest plant to earth in terms of density, size, and in distance. Earth, Mars, and Venus all are planetary neighbors. Something Earth is closter to Mars or we are closer to Venus, it just depends on the different speed. Venus is sometimes around the corner, in space terms. We, humans, have sent plenty of spacecrafts to land on cloud-draped world. But none of the spacecrafts have survived the landing less than a day. We havent had a single spaceship land down on Venus in more three decades. Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon diocide covers it. The clouds are th echallenging part because of te sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. The temperature is an average of about over 800 dergrees in Fahrenheit. The atmospheric presurre is 90 times greater that what we experince here on Earth. This conditiond are very extreme for us humans can encounter on earth. It also hads the hottest surface of temperture than any plant in our solar system. The geology and weather shows us erupting volcanoes, earthquakes, and constant lightning that strikes to the land of the surface. Venus is a very Earth-like plant in our solar system. It is covered with largely oceance and that could suppoort different forms of life, like our plant. It has a very rocky sediment which includes features such as valleys mountians, and craters. Venus has a lot of value. We should go out into the solar system and not be scare dof their dangers. I am sure that if Earth was empty and there were other things on Venus they would've been scared and would not want to come to Earth and do the things we are doing to Venus.

studying venus could lead to more scientific break throughs. studying this hot plantet is not a bad idea as long as it is done right and safley. it was as close to earth as it could be and could may as well had life on this planet so studing the planet is not a bad idea at all. the national aeronautics and space adminstation has already found diffrent ways to study the planet venus more clearly. if this could actully be done studying the planet would have a big effect on the tole of science and other forms of are solar system. the text states venus would allow scientists to float above the fray imagine a blimp like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling venusian landscape. this shows what could be done to studying this planet and what is could do for scients scientist have found many diffrent ways to study the planet. by using siple electronics mad of silicon that can last weeks in the chaos of venus's surface. this could make the studying of a new planet possible one day and sometime in the future venus may be studyed in alott better way. althogh there are many things that goes against exploring venus the dangors or even expensis. If one day in are future we could have the tecnollogay and the expensis that traviling to venus one day is not impossiple. traving to venus is not a bad idea in many ways it could be good for use to see and find out more about are solar system and if there is or was other life on diffrent planets.

In this writing prompt I will be supporting the authors argument. The author belives that Venus should be explored and belives exploring Venus would bring plentiful information that could help the world learn more about other plantes and ours. But for this to be an arguemnt there must be a danger or bad factor, the bad harmful factor is the dangers on Venus. Venus has many dangers that has harmed unmanned spacecrafts. More dangers will be explained further in the prompt. Venus is often called Earths twin, Venus is the planet that is most related to earth in terms of density and size. But Venus has many more dangers than Earth. Venus has an atmosphere of 97 percent carbon dioxide wich means humans will not be able to breath the air. Venus's surface is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than earths pressure. Because of the extremely high amount of pressure that would crush a submarine and melt any metal humans would nto be caple of landing on the surface of Venus without being crushed. And not only does Venus have very high tempertures, pressure and a deadly atmosphere, it also has erupting volcanos, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes. So why would we want to explore Venus if it is so inhospitable? Venus may have once had been like earth, with oceans and lifeforms. Venus does have a rocky surface with valleys, moutains and craters. Venus could be the human races next planet to inhabit if an incident would occur to Earth. Venus is the planet that is most like earth with its terrain and possible past life and water. Although Venus has its deadly dangers to humans, scientists are creating ways for humans to explore Venus and learn about this twin planet. " NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." (The Challenge of Exploring Venus,5) that statement from the excerpt states that scientists have come up with their theorys to explore Venus. They have an idea to send Humans above Venus's atmosphere to explore Venus so they do not melt by the extremely high tempertures or get crushed by the high pressure. With these ideas humans could explore Venus without being harmed and could gather needed information about the twin planet. Scientists are also working on other approaches to studying Venus with possible electronic devices that could last possibly up to three weeks on Venus's surface. With more time scientists could create more ideas and plans to explore Venus's surface. In this prompt I have explained the twin planet, Venus, and the dangers it holds. The author of the excerpt, " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. I have also explained the dangers Venus posses such as the high tempertures and the extremely high pressure. Scientists are creating more and more theorys of ways to explore Venus everyday. Therefore in the future I do belive we will explore Venus and that exploring Venus would be very plentiful to the humans race.

In the article "The challenge of Exploring Venus". The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it might present. Venus is the second planet from our sun, which makes it easier to see from Earth compared to all the other planets. In this article the author uses the dangers and the old projects to prove that Venus is a worthy pursuit. The author uses the dangers of studying Venus by using past experiences of traveling to Venus to prove that yes it has its risks, but it is worth it at the end. The author uses past experiences by stating in paragraph two "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for hunams to study, despite its proximity to us." This quote helps prove that landing on Venus has been a big challenge, but scientist are willing to overcome these challenges despite the dangers. The authour also states in paragraph six that " Scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges. Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus". This statement also helps prove the point that exploring Venus more is worth taking the risk because researchers are working on innovations to help the trips be more efficent. Which helps the author support the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. The author also uses old projects to help support the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. The author claims in paragraph seven "Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers. The devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and played an important role in the 1940s during World War II. The thought of computers existing in those days may sound shocking, but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Modern computers are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions." This passage suggest that by the use of mechanical parts can be made more resistant or could be adjusted to pressure, heat, and other things. By tweaking this the author suggest that studying Venus is worthy pursit. In the article the author uses the dangers and old projects to prove that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. Also by studying Veuns there could be alot more things discoverd by that panet. Yes, it consits of many dangers but their are mutiple things that have been learned from the past experiences that could possibly help us aviod that in the future. The author idea of studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite some of its dangers.

I am for the driverless car. I feel that these cars could make life easier. Lets think about some of the things that come with the car though. The car has features that are mind blowing. Some of those features are sensors for surroundings and a vibration of the seat etc. Also this car is almost self-driving, you hardly have to even touch the steering wheel. Also it could help you dramatically. This car makes a long trip a easy and fast one like your destination is right around the corner. First, the sensors are important for the car. Auto makers used sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock brakes. But within 10 years those sensors has become more advanced to detect and help you respond to danger. The sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce the power of the engine, allowing a better control of the car than a human driver could handle. Also the sensors could be used for your surroundings. When there is traffic and the car cant handle it, it sends you a message to take the wheel. This could prevent accidnets by alot. Next, this car a practically self-driving. This car can handle driving functions up to 25 miles per hour. The car also has special touch features to make sure if there is an emergency that you can take hold of the wheel. It can steer, accelerate, and brake all by themselves. But again the driver has to remain alert because the car may notify he/she when they need to regain control of the vehicle. Some of the notifications are heads up displays, vibration of the seat, or a sound. This car could actually help you out alot. Say your a person who cant multi task very well. Its raining outside and you cant direct your hand to the windshield wipers nozzle while keeping your eyes on the road. See now thats where the driverless car come in. While the car is driving and its raining outside and the windows get really wet, you can simply turn the winshield wipers on hassle free. This car could make you life alot easier. As a conclusion I have provided reason why I am for the driverless car. It has sensors to help me out on the road, its pratically self driving, and it could make my life alot easier. There are many other great reasons why I am for this car, but there was simply not enough space. Now I have one question, why wouldnt you buy it?

The author had a really good idea of exploring Venus. The ideas he gave is that it would be a risk to get someone onto venus the probblem with that is no aircraft have surive landing, the planet it is way to hot to even get to the surfis of the ground. The temputer of the planet is. 800 degress fahrenhit that is very hot thats pass blowling point. The planet has 97% carbon dioxide. Venus has colds that are highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The pressure on Venus is like the ocen if you go way to far down you get crushed. The people see this as a chellange to get to venus there are alot of dangers so not alot of people can get on the planet well not even one aircraft has handled down on to venus so that would make it even harder for a person to land down on Venus.

New and innovative things are created as the future grows near. Many of this inventions or discoveries help to advance our society, knowledge, and efficiency, however some of these inventions might seem like a step toward success, or like the most efficient thing possible, but it can also be a danger to the society. Driverless cars are one of these dangerous inventions. Although driverless cars might seem like the next big thing that allows the busy workers of today to multitask, can it also be a threat to the well-being of others? Driverless cars are likely to appeal to people in today's society for two main reasons that contradict each other. One of these reasons being that today's society consists of some of the most overbooked, not only adults, but teenagers as well. A driverless car likely peeks the interest of people like this because it allows them to multitask and have additional time to do homework or prepare a presentation for an important meeting, etc. The second main reason that contradicts the appeal to the first group of people, is that some people in today's society are also incredibly lazy. With so many inventions that make things easier in life, a driverless car is just another one. In today's society, technology is so advanced that people don't need to be face to face to communicate or "express" feelings with one another, so why would you if you don't have to? People can order food to be delivered to their homes, so why go to the store when you don't need to? People can use hoverboards to go down the street, so why walk when you don't need to? And so on. Although a driverless car won't be replacing any "physical activities" like walking or going to the store, etc. it does add to the lazieness of people in today's society. Although a driverless car can be served as a way to be more efficient and productive for some of the busiest people today, and can be a time for some of the lazier people in today's society to get in an extra twenty minutes or so of sleeping, it defeats the "guidelines" of a driverless car. Althougn a driver in a driverless car does not need to do any of the driving unless instructed otherwise by the car, the driver still does need to stay alert with there eyes on the road at all times in order to be on the lookout for any construction, accidents, etc. to avoid. Although people are instructed to continuing being alert even though they do not need to drive for the most part, knowing how people are today, many will just ignore this instruction or forget about it, which could put people's lives at risk. One of the biggest issues that can arise with a driverless car, is it mechanics and liability. Although after being thouroughly tested by Google, and it is reported that after driving more than half a million miles the cars did not crash, there is always a chance that there could be an accident. Although there is always this chance with normal cars and drivers, this can be more possible with driverless cars because the driver might not be alert like they should be, and there is a construction site that the car was not aware of, or the cars automatic brakes malfunction and the car crashes, etc. No matter what type of car it is, there is always a chance that something could go wrong. However, it is not only that driverless cars could be more dangerous than normal cars, but people in society today could be what sets these cars apart. With nearly everything automatic, people might take advantage of this feature and think that it protects them from everything, and be reckless with their actions. So, it is not that driverless cars could be more dangerous and a bigger threat to society, it is that people today could be more dangerous, more reckless, and bigger threat to society if they were provided with driverless cars. Therefore, it is is not that driverless cars are not ready for people in today's society, people in today's society are not ready for driverless cars.

The Face on Mars Have you heard about the Face on mars? Well if you haven't the Face is a picture Nasa took on Mars, this figure looks like a humans face. People agure that's possibly aliens did this, others agure that it's just part of the natural landmark on Mars. I believe that it's just part of the landform and that aliens have nothing to do with the Face. I believe that the Face is just part of natural landform, because there is no proof that aliens are even real. in the article it says, " Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing..... a natural lanmark. There was no alien monument after all." This shows that the Face has nothing to do with aliens. Some people believe that the Face is "bona fide" evidence of life on mars- evidence that Nasa would rather hide. I would say that there no reason why Nasa would lie and cover up the truth if something is living in Mars. If there were somthing that cause the Face, Nasa would of revealed it, because they would get more money. Once nasa went to take the picture again in April '98 it was a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. Skeptics still didn't believe Nasa that the Face was just natural landform. They argured that perhaps alien markings were hidden by haze. Although Nasa knows there is no proof that aliens excist so we can't predict that aliens have something to do with the Face. After all people have different opinion on this. There will still be people who believe it just a natural landform and others that think it has to do something with aliens. I still agree with Nasa that the Face is just part of the land on Mars. If some type of creature lived there then we would of discovered it by know. Back then we might not have had all the technology, but by now we would of discovered if someing was living on Mars. For now people will keep discussing their opinions on the Face.

Electoral Colleges is something many people disagree with but there is a few that are for the idea. Personally i think we should get rid of the Electoral colleges for many reasons. First, when using the electoral college you do not vote for the president but you vote for a slate of electors, I think when you are voting you should have a choice for which president you vote for not electors. Using this, the electors have to win which I dont think is right. Using electoral votes effects the people in smaller states. Big states have more of a "voice" to who wins the election if enough people vote. People living in smaller states have less of a chance of there choosen president to win because they dont have a large number of electoral votes. Saying that people in the smaller states know that they dont have much of a say to votes and are going to stop voting in general and stop paying attention to the campaigns. The winner-take-all method is something that voters dont like. Candidates know that some states dont have a lot of electoral votes so they dont bother to reach out to them and dont spend time on them because they think or know they dont have a chance of winning their election. Since candidates dont go to small states that means they spend all their time in the bigger states trying to win them over and get their votes. People dont think its fair that the candidates dont make any effort to pay attention to them. When you vote for who you want as president you dont actually vote for the president you vote mostly for a slate of electors. from the excerpt from "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" stated it is the electors that vote for presidents not us. i think that we should have more of a choice for who we want as our president but we do not. We should get rid of the Electoral College because it doesnt help us as i can see many people do not like it.

Dear Florida senator, I would like disuss why changing up the way we voyte today is not as bad f an idea as it sounds. Changing to elections by a popular vote sounds like its in the peoples hands instead of juts casting out votes on the slate electors. Aren't we voting for our president. innstead of countting onn the electoral votes to hep out or, go against out favor, it'd be much more easier to just let the people vote. The elctoral votes are utterly useless or unimportant,though. If there is ever happens to be a tie between the two candidates the electoral votes can help break it. It'd be less of a hassle to have the florida residents vote,directly, on someone besides the president. Less worring about if theyre going to win or not. Now when you start to think about it the electoral college is just unfair an pretty outdated,if you ask me. Change doesn't sound that bad. All im trying to achive by writting this, is to gain actual control over who we're all voting for. It's also not just what's completely wrong with the electoral college but how does it help in the first place? When you start analizing it, it really doens't help much. How much actual help can the lectora coellge make, in my defense not much. Why? Simple, its just 20-30 more votes and not many states have that much Hawaii has uop to 4 electoral votes, not much. Voters should be alowed to directly vote for who they want to be president and not rely on the lectoral college.

CHANGE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE!!! The Electoral College needs to either stop or change. There been so much that have happen over the years. For example, the  Gallup poll in 2000, right Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency. Which i didn't understand because, he won the vote's but lost the presidency. Over 60 percent of voters would perfer a direct election, like the one we have today. There are so many wrong things with the Electoral College. Under this system, voters vote not for the president, but for the state of electors. which who  in turn elect the president. For example, if u lived in texas, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you dont vote for a slate of 34 democratic electors pledged to Kerry. Another thing is the disaster factor. The disaster factor is when the american people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century. The system also allows for much worse. Basically the system want's to see us fail. If the system would realize how bad there hurting us and making us feel like our  vote doesn't matter. For example, again the 2000 scandle with the votes for president. We voted for this guy and he won most of the votes from the states but the Electoral College desided to give it to the other guy. Some of us just don't get how that works. What happen in 2000 have me to think that, maybe there are some sercet's that the us is not telling us, because they dont know  how we are going  to respond. There is probably a lot of things that would get a lot of people in trouble. What happen in the 2000 should open a lot of eyes right now. This world is so crazy today. We are trillion of doolars in debt probably because of the stupid disicions that the electoral college made on that day. Reading  this article, it said that the Electoral College is widely regarded as an Anachronism, 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, but what happen in 2000, it didn't go that way, they said how they pick the president. They made a big mistake, that we are paying for right now. They say the winner takes all but the winner in 2000 didn't really win. After reading this, i do not stand behind the electoral college.

There are some advantages of limiting car usage. For exampple, it can cause a lot of pollution, traffic jams in small cities, and thr greenhouse gas emissions. First of all, the advantages of limiting car usage is pollution. The passage states that "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." Meaning that, Paris had to ban driving because there was so much polution going on. Pollution is one of the biggest problems in the United States today. And most of the people argue about it when it's actually them causing all of it. In addition, the reason why they limit car usage is because in some small countries like, Colombia can cause a lot of traffic jams. The passage states that, "Bogota, Colombia-In a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams." also, in the passage it discussed that, "The turnout was large, despite gray clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota. Meaning that cars were causing all of the rain showers and that is why Colombia banned cars for one day only to decrease the traffic jam and to do somthing about the rain showers that is happening daily. Lastly, one of the advantages of limiting car usage is because of the greenhouse gas emissions. The passage states that, "President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week." Meaning that when a lot of people are using gas.       

Luke's point of view the seagoing cowboys program is great. it's becuase you learn new some inpornt tips and skills. it theches you thing. like how skills you'll need later on in life. after you make nine trips you'll be ready to get drafted to the military. when you get ready to go to the military they tell things that you'll going to need there. They helped luke prepare for hard work. on your second trip you serve as a nightman. luke loved being on board because all the wonderful and fun things they do. It opens up the to you. you will ride in a cattle boat every where you go. you will learn how to servie in the pacific war. you will broad a lot of different boats. you have to maked nine copmte trips before you can be drafted to military or the army. They have a lot of tools and skills that you will need when the program ends. in the program it takes a lot of hard work and you need to be strong because you have to lift a of boxes. you will glad that you went when the program is over.

I think for the election for presidency its should be counted on the popular vote. Why I think it should be on the popular vote is because it should count on what the people vote on,not on the electoral college. We should be the people to have the vote on the president and not just a piece of it. Plus the electoral colleges don't even vote on the president,they vote on a slate for the electors who then vote for president. voting should be on the popular vote now because the electoral colleges are not even voting on the president they're voting on the electors who vote for president. When if there was a direct vote we would then be voting just for the president. Yes sometimes we would vote someone else for president by accident ,but not as much as the electoral college does. thats why I think we should have a direct vote instead of having the electoral colleges voting for us pretty much. It just sounds like it would woork better if the people voted for president and not the people voinng for elctors who then vote for the president.  

Venus, the sister planet to Earth. When considered for exploration, there are many different reasons for or against exploration. Among the agaist exploration reasons are the immenent danger and hostile atmosphere. But with new research and development of technology, slowly we are getting to the point of being able to possibly reduce the risks of a failed mission. The author of " The challenge of Exploring Venus" agrees about the rewards of exploring Venus. There is a fair bit of evidence to support the exploration of Venus, chief among them the proximity to Earth, reducing the amount of time needed to arrive on Venus if we time a launch correcty. The other reason is that there is new research into old technology from the early 1900's to World War II, known as mechanical computers. These machines are simpler than you think though. All they are is a bunch of gears and levers and don't require electricity at all. Considering Venus's hostile conditions, this approach seems well guided in the thought of repurposing and reusing these ancient machines. All things considered, if these new developments are sucessful, and the timing is right, than we could possibly hear an announcement about a manned mission to Venus. Most likely not tommorrow, but it is possible in our lifetime to hear about this. The author supports the claim of possible exploration, and therefore with newfound evidence and reason, so do I.

In Making Mona Lisa Smile, there are really great points toward technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom. In the first paragraph it talks about the start of the computer program. In the last sentence of paragraph 1, it states "Dr. Huang and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to comminicate." In this case the communication is showing the computer how you feel and the computer doing something to change. This new technology of being able to tell how you are feeling on the computer is called FACS (Facial Action Coding System). There are 6 classified emtions- happiness, surprise, anger, digust, fear and sadness- and you can tell all of this with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. There are different facial expressions that you can tell if a smile is fake or not. In your real smile, the zygomatic major (muscles that begin at cheek bone) lift the corners of your mouth. The other muscles is called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus and that makes the corw's- feet around your eyes. If it is a fake smile, the mouth is streched out sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle called the risorius. You can easily tell how anyone is feeling just by looking at their facial expressions. I believe that you could use FACS to help with a lot of things. For examples, when a kid is broed at shcool or they are falling asleep in class, the computer will sence that and change up what is going on to the computer to make them stay focused or interseted longer. You can simply tell how one of your friends are feeling just by the look on their face or their facial expressions and sometimes you don't really know whats wrong you can just feel it. Now that they have came up with FACS you don't really have to worry about the expressions because sooner or later it will come out of them about what is wrong.

Dear state senator, I do not agree with the idea of the electoral college. The United States' president should be elected by popular vote and not just by a specific amount of electors. One great reason why the president of the US should be elected by popular vote is because the citizens won't really get to choose what president that they want to have for the next one or two terms. It is also unfair to the people that vote for their president (according to source 2.) We should really stick to the president being elected by popular vote. The president should be elected by popular vote because the people are practically not voting for their president. The majority of voter aren't voting for the president, but they're voting for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president(as said in source 2.) The electors that actually elect the president can be anyone not holding public office. The citizens that vote can not always control whom their electors vote for. It's official that the electoral college is also unfair to voters. Voters are voting for other electors to then elect the president. What if to say there was a tie after voting for the candidates? The election would be handed down to the House of Representatives, where the state delegations vote on the president. The electoral college is also unfair because of the win-take-all system in each state. Candidates won't stay in states where they know they a zero percent chance of winning, they'll only focus on the states with tight races. So there is why I agree that the electoral college should be abolished and the government should change the voting system so that the president is voted by popular vote. We need to abolish the electoral college because the presidents that are being elected are not being elected by the citizens, but instead the president is elected by the electors that are elected by the citizens. The electoral college process should go no further because it is unfair, outdated, and irrational. I really long to see a change in voting systems soon.    

The driverless cars has been an idea that has been around for many years. The thought of not having to waste energy in driving and to make the experience more relaxing for the individual. It will also display the amount of intellegence and engineering it would take in order to construct such a car. However, there will be many different people who will wish to insult and bring down the idea of the driverless cars. Not only that, but there will people in the world who would wish to turn the positive idea into a negative one. It will also start to corrupt our natural human abilities. What I mean by that is humans will start to become more and more relient on having everything completed for them with minimal effort envolved. Eventually, we will start to become lazier and lazier as advancements in technology increases. One thing to note, I am not entirely against automation or self-seficient machinery. However, how could we say that we are hard working individuals when a robot will be doing the work for us? Could we truely call ourselves hard working when all we would have to do is push a button? One major example of how this will be a problem in the future is the fact that there won't be any laws inplace of the driverless cars. Numerous states have already opposed the idea and plan to keep it that way until the cars are proven reliable. In paragraph 9, it also discusses who will be counted liable for an accident. "...if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault—the driver or the manufacturer?"(Waiting) The point that I am trying to make is that we are expanding too rapidly. The ideas are good and can be benificial in the future, but lets take our time and make shure that these driverless cars can actually drive themselves. It is difficult to say when these will be done, but when they are, I hope that it will be avalible for everyone.

Are you for or against the development of driverless cars? I am for the development of these cars. It sounds interesting to me. It can help those drivers who is unable to drive because of some kind disabilt in their body. It keeps a driver from falling a sleep behind the wheel and hurting someone because if the car is driverless, you can fall a sleep with out hurting anyone. The details that agree with what I wrote came from the passage. This is the first thing in the passage that agree with what I wrote. The line about the steering came from line four. The part about the cars steering themselves came in the passage part, number seven. The passage says the cars can steer themselves. The details that agree with what I wrote came from the passage. This is the second thing in the passage that agree with what I wrote. This is the public trainsport system line that came from line three. The part about public trainsport system came in the passage at part number one. The passage says that the public trainsport system will some day be driverless. The details that agree with what I wrote came from the passage. This is the four thing in the passage that agree with what I wrote. This is the half fuel of today's cars line that came from line three. The part about half fuel of today's cars came in the passage at part number one. The passage says that the cars will use half of the fuel of today's cars. That is sounds easier than it is. It is realiy hard. Driverless cars are possible. The cars so far still need a driver for some of the things. The car can do the steering. That sounds easier than it is. It is realiy hard, it just take some time. Driverless cars are possible. The cars so far still need a driver for some of the things. The car can do the breaking. That is sounds easier than it is. It is realiy hard. Driverless cars are possible. The cars so far still need a driver for some of the things. The car can do the accelerating on it's own but it still needs a driver. I am for the development of these cars. It sounds interesting to me. It can help those drivers who is unable to drive because of some kind disabilt in their body. It keeps a driver from falling a sleep behind the wheel and hurting someone because if the car is driverless, you can fall a sleep with out hurting anyone. I hope this essay showed my place on the subject of driverless cars.

A driverless car is a great idea in many ways but its not as realistic as most people think. There are so many things that can go wrong for a driverless car. The problems that would come along with driverless cars are why its not a great idea after all. Its true that there are alot of positives about a driverless car but there are also alot of negatives. One thing that comes to mind exteremely fast is software. Just like our cell phones a driverless car is going to need new updates. It the car does not get the updates it needs its not going to run as smoothly and as safely as it needs to. You have to look at it in the eyes that is not a car, its a computer. Sure cars have computers now but a driverless car is going to be on a much larger scale, it would be hard to even consider it a "car". A driverless car would be alot better for the environment but would it be alot better for people? Just think of how much money a driverless car would cost. middle and lower class people are not going to afford driving these cars. In the article it states that a driverless car would be alot better on gas than normal cars. That doesnt mean that the car is going to be cheaper than a normal car. Another thing you need to look at is liability. When a driver gets into an accedent it is usually the one at fault who is responsable for covering the accedent. The article says "If someone were to get into an accedent with a driverless car who would be at fault?" Im sure they already know the answer to that. I believe that the company in charge of making that car would simply say it was "human error" and blame the driver. People want these cars because they do not want to drive themselfs anywhere. People are lazy with alot of things. In the future if these cars do come out to the public driving would be just another thing you do that doesnt involve lifting a finger. With a driverless car, in the future a person would not even know how to drive. In conclusion, a driverless car wouldnt be that great of an idea. With the money a person would have to pay along with software updates and simply being lazy a driverless car would not be a good choice. Is it a great concept? Of course it is, it shows how the world is always coming up with new technology and evolving. There are alot of positive things about a driverless car but there alot, if not, more negative things. All and all a Driverless car would not be an invention that our generation needs.

What do you think about this new technology "Facial Action Coding System"? Do you think it is useful or just throwing more and more money down the drain, why does a computer need to know how we are feeling? It seems cool but do we really know if there is a catch at all, like what if the government is just trying to find another way to watch us? But who knows maybe there are some valuable things to come out of it, like a teacher would be able to see if there students are having a hard time on an online assignment, bored about to fall asleep, or even just having a bit of fun. It shows that they care and higher technology is coming! It is not that weird to think about actually because we can tell when somone is upset so what is the difference does that mean were weird or have something to hide? A computer that knows when you're happy or sad that's awesome! The "Mona Lisa" is intended to bring a smile to our face, just imagine what a computer can do, if you smile into the Web cam to an ad you may just see more that may appear on your computer that make you happy or if you find a picture that makes you frown they'll make sure you won't see any similar pictures/ads. The process all begans once the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face, all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. That's not the last thing it also says that according to "Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion" it does't only express emotions but also may even help produce them! Are you questioning the whole situation different now? Hopefully because it doesn't sound that bad, maybe it'll be for the better, we just have to give everything a chance.

Driverless cars should be developed and used. There are many ways that driverless cars could help us. Safety is a main concern but many accidents occur due to the driver being disctracted or someone else's fault. Driverless cars will have sensors to stay on a certain course and not get off track. The sensors could also detect if something is too risky such as backing up in a parking lot. When a time like that occurs the driver must drive the car until the car can handle the situation. Many accidents occur due people using a celluar device and losing track of where they are. In a driverless car this could be prevented because the driver is not driving the vehicle. They could use their phones but they must know when the car cannot be piloted in a sticky situation. A driverless car could also be used as a taxi driver for those that drink and drive. Driverless cars can also help semi truck drivers that drive around for hours and hours. Advanced computer systems could be put in the driverless cars to prevent enviromental issues on the road. The systems could also prevent possible rollovers and sliding off the road. It will be very costly but we can save many lives and prevent many accidents from occuring. So driverless cars can prevent many accidents and they could help many people in making their job a whole lot easier. It will be costly but it will be worth all the lives that can be saved and helped.