Two examples of good work

Which came first - the stagnant puddle or the microorganism? 

An attempt to iron out the wrinkles of technical ignorance surrounding turbidity and bacteria with the Bunyanesque weight of scientific evidence and blistering logic.

By: Will Schrenkeisen

Dec. 11, 2008

  Picture a tall glass full of fresh, crystal clear water. You hold it aloft, impaling the pellucid chalice on a brilliant shaft of purest sunlight, sending a dazzling pattern of refracted light cavorting throughout your surroundings. You quaff daintily from it to slake your overpowering thirst, your tender taste buds and olfactory nerves blessedly free of any fetid influence. For most, this is the very image of healthy cellular refreshment. Yet how many people would be as blasé about quenching their thirst if the glass in question was full of a murky, stagnant brew with a rancid odor? The word used to describe water in terms of these very attributes is turbidity. The more discolored, funky smelling, or otherwise offensive a water sample is, the higher its turbidity rating (more on this later). Obviously the turbid water mentioned above is not fit for consumption (drinking your own urine would probably be much safer), but a common misconception of this phenomena is that high bacteria levels somehow cause water to become turbid. In fact, the situation is reversed. Bacteria cannot spontaneously cause turbidity, but the more turbid a body of water is, the easier it is for bacteria to survive.

  The visual indication of turbidity (cloudy, murky, discolored, or any other suitable adjective) is caused by suspended solids in the water; particles that can run the gamut from fine sediment to industrial by-products to planktonic life forms. These suspended solids cause the water to lose its clarity by scattering light, thus limiting visibility. Odor can be caused by the waste products of bacterial metabolism, but smelling water is not a very reliable test for bacterial concentrations (bacteria can smell very different from one another). Turbidity can be measured with any one of a plethora of tests, but perhaps the most simple, reliable, and effective measurement is obtained through a nephelometer. A nephelometer (more commonly referred to as a turbidimeter when used for water testing) functions by projecting a beam of light through a medium (liquid or gas) and measuring the amount of light reflected off the particles into a detector. In the United States the results are expressed in Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU), and internationally with Formazin Nephelometric Units (FNU), but can also be expressed in Formazin Turbidity Units (FTU). 

  First, clarification must be made on the term “bacteria”, as it will be used extensively in this article. Bacteria come in a bewildering array of forms with equally diverse effects and requirements, and not all of them malicious. Consider, for instance, that there are about 10 times as many bacteria cells in your body than your own cells. In seawater, the most common form of bacterial agents are Bacteriophages, with as many as 250,000,000 per milliliter of seawater. However, these miniscule viruses operate by infecting other viruses and bacteria, and so are of little consequence to the objective of this article. Pathogenic bacteria, on the other hand, are the organisms responsible for the majority of medical cases associated with swimming in (or drinking) polluted seawater, such as Amoebiasis, Otitis media and externa, Conjunctivitis, or Gastroenteritis. Viruses, though responsible for a great deal of much more potent maladies (including Adenovirus and some flesh eating diseases), generally cannot infect a host (swimmer) unless the individual’s skin, and thus their innate immune system, is compromised with a cut or lesion.

  Unfortunately, these harmful bacteria are very difficult to test for, largely because of their tremendous variety of species and subgroups (making it inefficient, costly, and time consuming to test and catalogue their numbers). Due to this difficulty, biologists test for indicator bacteria, organisms that can be readily tested for and correspond significantly to the levels of other pathogenic bacteria (though the indicator species are not particularly virulent). Three common types of indicator bacteria biologists test for are total coliforms, E. coli, and Enterococci. The term total coliforms serves to define a very broad group of bacteria which can originate from soil, decaying vegetation, or the intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals. E. coli (short for Escherichia coli) is a type of coliform found in the lower intestines of warm blooded animals, which when present even in small quantities is a strong indication of recent sewage or animal waste contamination. Enterococci is a subgroup of the fecal streptococcus group and closely mimics the behavior of many kinds of pathogenic bacteria, making it an ideal bacterium to test for. Finding the most probable number (MPN) of these indicator bacteria gives an indication (hence the name) of the population of their pathogenic cousins, and because of this relationship the EPA has set certain standards that when broken merit a beach advisory. These standards are; total coliforms - 10,000/100ml, E. coli - 235/100ml, and Enterococci - 104/100ml.

  As briefly mentioned above, turbidity can be brought on by several things; algae, plankton, sediment, fecal matter, and storm runoff being among them. In fact, anything that can cause a great deal of small particles to mix with water is a potential culprit. High bacteria levels cannot create turbid conditions, as the organisms are too small to scatter any noticeable amount of light. However, turbid conditions can give rise to escalated bacterial concentrations, since the light scattering properties of sediment, algae, plankton, etc. serve to shield bacteria from the rays of the sun, including the ultraviolet spectrum, one of the major limits of aquatic bacterial growth (bacteria and viruses can also attach themselves to the solids, providing effective shelter and insulation from chlorine and other disinfectants). In addition to this, the suspended matter (possibly soil, runoff, or excrement) could itself be harboring various microorganisms or providing food for the bacteria as it decays (or perhaps both), as the case would be if the cloudy conditions are caused by human sewage, animal feces, or algae. 

  Unfortunately, this is only the tip of the iceberg, as high turbidity can reduce or eliminate the amount of light reaching aquatic plants, limiting their photosynthetic capacity and reducing the amount of oxygen they release into the water. In addition, particulate matter can adversely affect the function of gills and the development of eggs and larvae. All of this is especially true in lakes, reservoirs, and bays, as there is little if any current to dissipate the suspended solids (in many cases there is only enough to keep them suspended). If enough suspended solids have accumulated and enough plant life has been choked out, the fish, shellfish, and other animals which rely on them for both food and oxygen will begin to die. Obviously, increased levels of dead and dying animals in the water, along with organic detritus (possibly from algae, plankton, and decaying macrophytes), in combination with the sheltering properties of suspended solids will lead to high levels of bacteria. If this cycle continues for long enough, it can lead to the body of water in question undergoing hypoxia or anoxia, resulting in a dead zone.

  Hopefully, having finished this article, the reader will possess a greater understanding of the nuances of turbidity than when they started. They (that is to say, you) are now equipped with the necessary tools to plumb the inky depths of scientific understanding, to avoid the deadly pits and mantraps that so often snare the unwary. After all, roughly 50% of all people surveyed with a brief series of water related questions expressed the opinion that bacteria is the primary determining factor in water quality. This shocking inaccuracy can be avoided through the simple expedient of reading the information presented above, cross-referencing it with the source material, and extrapolating to form a rock-solid, scientifically viable set of personal opinions. Just imagine what could be accomplished if more people knew that bacteria is a product of turbidity, and not the other way around.

“Turbidity.” Wikipedia. 7 Dec. 2008

“Turbidity.” Water on the Web. 17 Jan. 2008. 7 Dec. 2008

“Understanding Turbidity.” USGS. 7 Nov. 2002. 8 Dec. 2008 <http://ga2.er.usgs.gov/bacteria/helpturbidity.cfm>

“Office of Water.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 21 Nov. 2008. 3 Dec. 2008

“Nephelometer.” Wikipedia. 6 Dec. 2008

“Bacteria.” Wikipedia. 5 Dec. 2008

“Total Suspended Solids.” Wikipedia. 5 Dec. 2008

This editorial is good work for me, and I am slightly proud of it. My opinion stems from what I see as proficient use of metaphor to "hook" the reader, a hook that rapidly devolves into a mire of inconsequential details and half-answers. It does have a relatively lengthy list of sources, even though four are from Wikipedia (incidentally, Wikipedia is the best internet source for everything imaginable, and I do not know why people insist on using Google, because all Google does is link you to related web pages, most of which are written by people with absolutely no knowledge of the subject).

I accomplished these glowing achievements by making extensive use of Thesaurus.com and Wikipedia. For once, I actually made drafts of my work, a practice that I generally eschew because it involves more work than is necessary to arrive at a passable final product. Ironically, the only person to provide consistent, helpful feedback and revisions was myself, somewhat limiting the effectiveness of the entire process and making me wish I had simply typed up the whole thing in the last two days, as is my wont. I feel that this approach would have saved me time, boredom, and frustration, while producing an editorial of comparable quality.

Sadly, this next example cannot be displayed directly on the page of this blog, but I urge the reader to view it by using this simple link. It is a satire I wrote with a good friend (named Nathan Eisenberg) in middle school, and every time I read it I get a laugh out of it. This satire is quite possible my favorite piece of writing, though some may find it slightly offensive. Reading it gives me pangs of nostalgia, from a time when I could actually write for fun and find the process inherently enjoyable (something that is happening less and less with all these damn analytical essays). I liked the piece so much that I substituted it for a slightly related project in 9th grade instead of writing one from scratch, which is how it ended up on the pages of my freshman DP. 

Me and my pal accomplished this by brainstorming over a piece of scratch paper for an assignment in which we had to construct a satire on any issue after reading a historical satire as a class (I cant remember the details but it was from either Ireland or Scotland and had to do with food, possibly potatoes, and poor people). It was not very hard as we were both fairly competent writers and filled with humor and inspiration for this particular issue.

Sea Shepherd morality

- New Yorker article on the Sea Shepherd - Nov. 5, 2007

After reading this article and contemplating the methods employed by one Paul Watson, I have come to the conclusion that what he does is perfectly acceptable, and if it is illegal it should not be. I have reached this conclusion not necessarily on behalf of the whales (though I oppose whaling), but because of what his tactics and activities represent. It seems that there are so many laws, regulations, restrictions, jurisdictions, and limitations (imposed by the few in power over the millions without) that the world is gradually being converted into some sort of very large clockwork toy to gather dust on the desk of some wealthy, influential individual. For example, this man (Watson) is diametrically oppose to whaling in all its forms and appears to delight in employing any means necessary to put a stop to it, yet he cannot legally resort to certain extremes. Why is this?

I find it interesting that he manages to do the things he does and avoid being labeled as a pirate (or worse) and thrown in jail (or worse). It seems that his publicity is a huge advantage to him, to the extent that he could not operate the way he does and retain any semblance of respectability without it.

During the process of reading this article, I was struck by a one of Watsons ideas, because it bore striking resemblance to an intellectual impass I had been pondering myself. It was the problem of population and how it relates to our dependence on nature. According to the article, Watson proposed reducing the worlds population to a billion through unspecified means. In my opinion, as the human population continues to expand, the problems we are seeing with greenhouse gasses, food, environmental balance, and animal life will progress apace. Even if we manage to rein in our most destructive habits and replace our inefficient, dirty technologies with green ones, eventually there will be so many people that even these new technologies will not be enough. What then will we do? Is there anything we could do at present to forestall this grim future? Of course, it is not difficult to predict which course mankind would take when all else fails, as all the evidence we need is in our past. I predict that either governments would instigate some sort of mass-culling process (which would lead to gigantic civil wars), or, with the lack of food and other resources, people will just start killing each other to make room (not exactly war, because civilization would essentially collapse, but pretty close to it), and possibly resorting to cannibalism. It certainly is a sticky situation, because no one would be prepared to regulate the population (and no one really has the right to either), but doing so could benefit the species, and indeed, the entire planet in the long run.

In the end, this article brought to my attention the futility of modern society. There are tangible benefits to be had by reverting to some sort of tribal structure, as doing so would address many of the problems plaguing our current system (disagreements would tend to lead more readily to fights, keeping the population in check). However, such a system would bring up just as many problems as it could potentially solve (nuclear weapons, wide-scale eco-devastation with nothing to prevent it but other tribe/clan opinions, genocide, etc.). It seems that we have become so dependent on laws and regulations keeping our world of technologically advanced weaponry in check that to remove them would open the doors to some psychopath amassing a nuclear arsenal and destroying inconceivable multitudes and causing potentially irreparable damage to the environment.

Response essay to Marie Arana's article on racial language

- Washington post article He's Not Black by Marie Arana - Nov. 30, 2008

I agree with this article on many points, but disagree on just as many. I agree that to make assumptions about a person's genealogy based on the shade of their skin is as unfair as it is uninformed. I find many points of contention, however, with the authors focus on words, a reliance that strikes me as ironic. The words "white, black, yellow, brown, etc." are merely what people use to convey certain concepts or images. To the best of my knowledge, language as we know it developed to enable our distant ancestors (who, incidentally, were African) to convey the thoughts their minds produced to the other members of their hunting/gathering group, facilitating teamwork. They might have decided to refer to rocks as rocks, but that does not imply any level of knowledge beyond that rocks are heavy round things that can be found on the ground. The word is merely a conduit to transport a thought, not a description of the object's every characteristic. 

The profound irony of of racial tension (as I see it) is that the more sensitive people become towards the entire issue, the more difficult it becomes to overlook. The only reason a particular word or phrase becomes offensive is because of the way society views it, not because of any inherent trait of the word. I recognize that this issue is a very delicate one for many people, and that in all probability I know next to nothing about the realities of racial discrimination or labeling, but is it not apparent, at least, that the more delicate an issue becomes, the easier it is to cross the line? 

If you are describing a person, (or even something as mundane as a fence or building) you will likely choose the words that convey the most information about the subject with the least amount of effort or time. Another example that may help to illustrate my disagreement is paint. Let us choose green. The color green is not a primary color, meaning that in order to make it one must combine both yellow and blue. Despite this, you do not call green paint yellow-blue, for there is no such color. Yellow-blue is green, and varying the ratio of yellow to blue results in different shades of green (yellow-green and blue-green to name but a few). It may be true that a far more accurate word could be found to replace green, but, having said that, why would it be necessary? 

I personally have no compunctions against someone labeling me as "white", and I certianly don't expect them to call me a Caucasian or a European (I have never been to Europe, so why would my ancestry automatically make me European? I believe there is a fine line between race and culture), but recognize that this could be do to the not-so-subtle predominance of white males in both history and modern society. It is far easier to denounce something when you have no actual experience with the issue at hand (racism, or more specifically racial terminology).

The bottom line, then, is that I see the article as promoting one set of broad connotations in favor of an even broader set, with the only real difference being how these connotations are applied. Is it truly favorable to designate people by their ancestry (labels that will, in time, develop their own negative implications), which they most likely have very little actual association with? 

An analysis of literary techniques in Mark Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer

Before going into depth on the tactics employed by Mr. Twain to bring his story to life, I feel obliged to say that I have never read this book before now, and was very reluctant to begin at first. However, after reading the novel in its entirety, I found that it was an excellent story. Short, concise, filled with imaginative language, events, descriptions, and a wonderfully dry sense of satirical humor, I greatly enjoyed this book, despite my adamant bias against classical literature (old books).

I believe that the primary theme of this novel could be best described as: A metaphorical analysis of the irony of society. I reached this conclusion based on the volume of satirical dissections of basic habits, and how the strict, sometimes arrogant adult society was shown to mirror the less sophisticated child society in many ways. For example, the children held in high esteem many superstitions, so many, in fact, that they were essentially free to choose their interpretations of them. A very long excerpt that shows this freedom (pg. 76) is:

"If you buried a marble with certain necessary incantations, and left it alone a fortnight, and then opened the place with the incantation he had just used, you would find that all the marbles you had ever lost had gathered themselves together there, meantime, no matter how widely they had been separated. But, now this thing had actually and unquestionably failed. Toms whole structure of faith was shaken to its foundations. He had many a time heard of this thing succeeding, but never of it failing before. It did not occur to him that he had tried it several times before, himself, but could never find the hiding-places afterwords. He puzzled over the matter some time, and finally decided that some witch had interfered and broken the charm."

This practice seems to mimic many of the adult's fixation on religion, a belief that was very widespread in that time.  

The literary technique that jumped out at me most immediately was the way the author analyzed traits that are so deeply ingrained in society as to be almost invisible (actually I am not sure if this is a literary technique in the strictest sense of the word, but it was something that was done exceedingly well and greatly enhanced my appreciation of the story, so I consider it one). He also managed to do this without interrupting the flow of the story (I thought it even helped move it along and develop the theme). Early in the book, the author described his views on the relationship of work to play, a comparison that brought to my mind a psychological analysis I read at some point in some obscure piece of writing. If I remember correctly, it was about how people only covet what they do not have, and the moment it becomes easily attainable, it loses its intrinsic value. Mr. Twain wrote essentially the exact same thing (pg. 19):

"If he [Sawyer] had been a great and wise philosopher, like the writer of this book, he woud now have comprehended that Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do, and that Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do. And this would help him to understand why constructing artificial flowers or performing on a treadmill is work, while rolling tenpins or climbing Mont Blanc is only amusement."

As one can see, this observation is only slightly different from the statement above, and certainly worded in such a manner as to make it amusing and interesting. In fact, he then went on to connect it to a humorous yet insightful example which, though drawing from now extinct practices, nevertheless conveys the precise message it was intended.

"There are wealthy gentlemen in England who drive four-horse passenger-coaches twenty or thirty miles on a daily line, in the summer, because the privilege costs them considerable money; but if they were offered wages for the service, that would turn it into work and then they would resign."

I noticed this idea referred back to several times during the course of the book, which ties into the next device: that of allusion. 

Mark Twain made numerous allusions back to previous concepts at various points in the book, something I noticed and appreciated more than I would if he made allusions to external sources (I believe this practice also adds to the immortality of the piece, because although most books employ allusion, a great deal of them do so with concepts that fade with time, equally dimming the novel's theme). Since Mr. Twain alluded to points he had made in earlier parts of the same book, which were themselves satirical observations on  human nature (which does not fade nearly as fast as other topics, if at all), his works (of which I have only read one) remain relevant while others do not. One allusion (pg. 278) that linked to the very same observation quoted above is:

"'Why, its not as light as it might be. Got bricks in it?-or old metal?' 'Old metal, said Tom.' 'I judged so; the boys in this town will take more time hunting up six bits' worth of old iron to sell to the foundry than they would to make twice the money at regular work. But that's human nature-hurry along, hurry along!'"

As you can see, this quote shows that even on page 278 the author was alluding to points made in the very beginning stages of the novel.

The author also used a certain amount of hyperbole when describing certain events or objects, a practice that I believe was intended to bring the reader closer to the characters by describing things from their own point of view (that of a child). Perhaps the most obvious use of this device was when describing the children's transactions, which never involved actual money, but things that most "mature" people would consider junk, or even trash (the distinction being objects that are considered worthless as opposed to objects people would actively try to rid themselves of). A quick quote that shows this (pg. 55) is:

"'What's that you got?' ' Dead cat.' 'Lemme see him, Huck. My, he's pretty stiff. Where'd you get him?' 'Bought him off'n a boy.' 'What did you give?' 'I give a blue ticket and a bladder that I got at the slaughter-house.'"

Hyperbole was also used when describing Tom Sawyers imagination, like becoming a pirate or robber. These aspirations were accompanied by spirited descriptions that exaggerated their merits and technical achievability by no small degree (pg.75):

"But no, there was something even gaudier than this. He would be a pirate! That was it! Now his future lay before him, and glowing with unimaginable splendor. How his name would fill the world, and make people shudder! How gloriously he would go plowing the dancing seas, in his long, low, black-hulled racer, the Spirit of the Storm, with his grisly flag flying at the fore!"

Hyperbole relates to the theme because it is a technique that allowed the author to develop the plot, deepen the character, and bring the reader closer to the way Tom Sawyer thought, therefore understanding him better. This practice also relates to the first literary device I described, that of "trait analysis through psychological observations", by depicting how Sawyer felt about unlawful activities such as piracy, which ties into the pseudo psyche-analysis proposed by Twain: that play is whatever a person is not obliged to do. 

Thanksgiving

Part one: I am thankful that my family has not been plunged into bankruptcy by the economic devastation currently underway, and I am equally grateful that Barack Obama has been nominated president. I am thankful that my family has nearly completed yet another year without enduring any earth shattering upheavals, and that our dog is still blessed with good health. In short I am thankful for everything that is positive in my life and those around me while acknowledging that without misfortune (see below), happiness fades into indistinction.

Part two: Before Thanksgiving break is over, I will complete a reasonably fleshed out draft of my article, sift through the results of the survey me and my partner will be instigating tomorrow (boiling it down into usable information), and distill the beach closure and advisory records (from about five years ago until now) from certain choice websites (most likely Heal the Bay or SD Beach advisory board) into a concentrated state which I can use to write both the fleshy draft and final editorial.

Part three: I will

Another H2O project post

1. So far I am discovering the inherent difficulty of amassing enough accurate scientific resources to compose an informative, interesting, structured, and complex editorial about an issue that I have no knowledge of.

2. I am surprised by how difficult it is to "get the ball rolling", so to speak, and also find good internet sources that answer my questions. It would seem that the vast, ethereal, extra dimensional space that is the internet is filled with nothing but poorly written, highly uninformative pseudo-advertisements and tiny websites that have no purpose. I do not know why Google has attained such notoriety, because there is no way anyone could search through more than a few pages of the results. I hope to find a better, more concise search engine in future to facilitate more expedient data retrieval. It seems strange to me when I consider that Google is the only way I or anyone else seems to navigate the convoluted and myriad threads of binary code that the internet consists of (I think it consists of binary code but I could be wrong), and stranger still to consider the immaterial nature of this nigh ubiquitous resource. What is the internet exactly? Does it have a central section? A physical headquarters? A brain? Anything even remotely resembling anatomical structure? Or is it simply code floating around in some indefinite space that we cannot penetrate with any of our natural senses? That seems ridiculous to me, not the concept of an intangible location, but the fact that if it occupies an impalpable dimension, it had to have gotten there somehow, and since the internet is man-made, it follows that this jumble of code was introduced to the area by human hands, which I do not believe to be possible.

3. My next steps are to prepare for a survey and ask anyone and everyone who might have even a scrap of marine knowledge all I can to better my own understanding of my question (which is practically non-existent).

Editorial critique

- Harvard Prof on Barack Obama, Integration and Inclusion

- New York Times editorial on Native American voting rights by Adam Cohen - June 21, 2008

Native Americans have a history of oppression. First it was at the hands of european immigrants,  then Americans. As can be seen through the link above, prejudices are still manifesting themselves today, though in the form of voter suppression. In certain regions the often democratic leaning Native American populations are the have been the targets of voter suppression.

Example products

- New York Times article on sewage and storm runoff by Anthony DePalma - Aug. 11, 2007

I liked this article for three reasons:

1. It combined qualitative and quantitative data, providing numerical evidence and shocking statistics in concert with quotes and simple explanations. I will try to emulate this article's wonderful mix of the above elements in my own article.

2. It addressed an important issue and gave reasons for its importance. The article educated me on the archaic sewage system of New York and provided simple yet profound examples of how it is not up to the challenges of rising temperatures and population.

3. The article caused me to think about the situation for a few minutes when I was through reading. The author achieved this by describing an ironic situation that throws light on how people think (If you are curious read the article), which left me pondering, among other things, why there is so much cement and asphalt everywhere.

If I can use some of the techniques I noticed in this article, I would be much happier with my final product than otherwise. Another article I found useful was:

- New York Times article on genes by Carl Zimmer - Nov. 10, 2008

Three things:

1. It had nice pictures, which helped by making it more aesthetically appealing.

2. It contained information that was relevant to me, because of what I am studying in biology class. Obviously an article needs to be about a topic people can connect with and use, or they either won't find it interesting or just not read it.

3. It had a huge amount of evidence and quotes sewn into it, adding weight.

If I can keep these points in mind while writing my article I am sure I will stand a much better chance of getting a good grade and being personally satisfied with my writing.

Various Stuff

Part one: Questions
1. How do you feel about the result of the election?

I was pleased that Obama won, and I hope he can effect the kind of dramatic changes this nation is in such desperate need of. I believe my optimism is shared by many, and not just Americans. This NY Times article was inspiring and uplifting, though unfortunately I do not know how much of it to trust.

2. What are your hopes for America and your community in the next 4-8 years?

I hope that we can not only free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, but spearhead the multi-national push for clean, renewable sources of energy. I believe that if America, the biggest polluter on the planet, can essentially overhaul its entire society to be more eco-friendly, it will send a strong message to practically every other nation that renewable energy is not only viable, not only possible, but essential. Of course, I understand that it is unrealistic to expect all of this in 4 years, but we've got to start somewhere, and the sooner we do start the sooner we can finish and move on to other crises. I see energy as the most pressing issue facing the impending presidency, closely followed by economical repair (so that we can actually accomplish energy independence and cleanliness).

3. What are your concerns for America and your community for the next 4-8 years?

One of my biggest concerns is that attempting to clean up after president Bush will occupy so much of Obama's time and budget that his own agenda will be correspondingly truncated. My second concern is for Obama's health, because there are so many people who cannot see past their ignorance, hatred, and misguided beliefs. I can only hope that the secret service is up to the challenge of protecting him and his family from assassination.

4. Evaluate your level of civic knowledge:

Without doubt, my comprehension of American politics and history has grow to unprecedented heights (personally) during the course of this class, and I would even say that I have learned more in this class than all of my previous history classes put together. Having said that, There is a vast amount I have yet to cultivate an understanding of.

5. What have we done well in this class to help you understand current events?

I lose track of the amount of times I have been asked this question, and the answer is always the blog. Writing regularly about current events and often applying them to historical precedents has turned out to be an excellent way to keep me informed of international goings-on and deepen my understanding of American history. Another way would be how we apply history to useful, relevant current affairs in class discussions and reading. In the past, all we seemed to do was read a textbook on the revolutionary war, America's separation from England, and George Washington. I think I learned about the same period in history in five different classes without ever being presented with interesting, relevant information I could apply to my life in any way (I do not see a point in memorizing information you do not know how to use, because it would not really be "learned" would it? The knowledge would simply exist in the mind long enough to scrape by on some meaningless test designed to evaluate one's "understanding" of a concept before fading forever).

Part two: Project plan

A) Resources: I plan to interview key personnel at the Point Loma Water Treatment Plant (I have yet to determine the precise identities of the interviewees), along with some civic engineers acquainted with my teacher. Hopefully, quoting these experts will add an air of factual and intellectual savvy to an otherwise dry and patchwork article. Most unfortunately, I do not believe that writing about the effects of a single water treatment facility (PLWTP) will paint a very broad portrait of the near-global phenomenon of large scale waste disposal, so I am still looking for another site to act as a comparison. Failing that, I must rely on the civic engineers to supply my article with the breadth of expertise necessary to captivate and educate every poor soul that mentally digests my article.

B) People: Sadly, I am not yet at such an advanced stage of the planning process, and therefore am unaware of exactly whose brain I will be combing.

C) Schedule:
Nov. 8-11/gather internet resources and develop canny interview questions
Nov. 12-14/set up interviews
Nov. 17-21/Interview subjects
Nov. 22-29/Thanksgiving break
Dec. 1-12/Write article, revise article, get article critiqued, revise article again

2 research questions

   For the upcoming "state of the beach" project, I am considering articles based on the following questions. Ultimately, I will be choosing one of these to write an informative, grammatical, and well structured article about. The first question is:

How much filtration does waste water go through at key treatment plants before it is returned to the ocean?

I feel that I can address this with a nice mixture of qualitative and quantitative data that will provide the average reader with some shocking statistics and provoke reasonably deep ethical ruminations. The second question is:

How does our own pollution affect us?

Obviously, this is an extremely open-ended question, but I would attempt to localize it somewhat by focusing on California's proximity and relationship to/with the pacific. I actually plan to integrate the two questions regardless of which one I end up writing about, because they compliment each other very well. 

   I came up with the first prompt both because of interest and a field trip the class took last year to a water treatment plant for an entirely unrelated project. I plan to apply some of the knowledge gleaned from that trip, and visit that same plant and others to interview them on their work and provide excellent primary sources for my article. I am leaning heavily towards the first question, mainly because the second is so indefinite, but also because I believe the second would be more effective if integrated with the first than on its own. I have not yet given any serious thought to the structure of the article, but for the first question I hope to include information on water treatment standards, the amount of sewage dumped in the ocean (along with percentages; how much of it was treated and to what extent), bacteria content during various stages of treatment, the treatment process itself, the effect on nearby wildlife, and some information on currents and how the sewage travels (treated and untreated). I would also like to cover the following concepts in article #1, though they are more related to question #2: in relation to how the sewage effects wildlife, address how we rely on said wildlife (be it fish, plankton, crabs, lobster, or any other marine creature), touch briefly on natural water treatment processes and how sewage affects them in a wider context, and how our own pollution eventually cycles back to affect us and what it can do when it does. As stated above, I think the best resource would be the treatment plants themselves, but there are undoubtedly certain books that offer a wealth of information on the subject, and a brief, very unspecific google search provided these sources: a diagram and the workings of a treatment machine, some info on currents, sewage's effects on wildlife in the antarctic, and general information on sewage. 

   For the second article, I would need to narrow my focus tremendously, because I know from experience that if I have such a general topic, I could write on for pages and pages but never actually address the question. A few areas that I think would be good to cover in answering this question are: the way water cycles through the environment naturally (e.g. rain, rivers, and mountains) and how sewage is cycled with it, how we and all other life rely on this cycle, how this cycle affects the environment when it is polluted (such as acid rain), and perhaps spend some time hypothesizing on the conundrum of a growing population along with how this might affect the delicate balance that is nature, a balance that has already been so manipulated. I could certainly draw some evidence from the ecology of China, but the article would be primarily focused on America. I could also touch on the affects of global warming, greenhouse gasses, and garbage sequestration, especially plastic, along with providing some coverage of the "north pacific gyre". 

   In the end, I would touch on both questions to varying degrees in whichever topic I choose, (or am assigned, I am not sure if I will have the liberty of designating the article myself) because of their close relationship with one another. In hindsight, and after giving thought to addressing the second question, I feel that I could write a fairly good article about either of them. The first would require a vast amount of reading and resource-management, while the second would call for some extremely competent tie-ins between all of the disparate concepts I would be covering. Both have advantages and disadvantages, and at this point I have no idea which to choose.

Electoral scandals: ACORN vs. vote suppression

- CNN commentary on voting dangers by Donna Brazile - Oct. 27 2008

- CNN "voter purges" article by Abbie Boudreau and Scott Bronstein

- Market Watch RNC article ACORN and voter registration - Oct. 8 2008

- NY Times article by Bob Herbert - August 16, 2004

- Huffington Post vote suppression article by Michael Carmichael - Oct. 21 2008

- Democracy Now transcript on vote rigging by Greg Palast - Oct. 9 2008

- Factcheck on ACORN

   ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has been at the center of a fierce controversy in recent months over their voter registration scandal. This controversy, fueled primarily by rabid Republicans, has been dubbed by many experts to be of little overall consequence in relation to electoral subversion. The dispute centers on the fact that ACORN solicitors submitted numerous false voter registration forms in order to meet certain goals set by the organization. The frauds were not instigated by the organization itself, which helps explain why no charges have been filed against ACORN amidst the storm of political outrage spearheaded by McCain and Palin. In fact, ACORN is required by law to submit all of the forms they receive from their canvassers to local election officials, and leave it up to them to weed out the falsified forms, (see factcheck.org) although they flag suspicious candidates. This information alone practically nullifies the Republican outrage, since if ACORN discarded the forms themselves everyone would be screaming about how the organization broke the chain of bureaucracy. As stated by nearly every competent source, the real concern should be vote suppression, a much more worrisome and realistic possibility. According to Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist;

"A simple cost-benefit analysis tells us this [registration fraud] is not a reasonable or significant threat. The real threat here is the Republican Party using attacks on ACORN as a calculated strategy to justify massive challenges to the votes cast in Democratic-leaning voting precincts on Election Day. And this is what is truly outrageous, but where is John McCain's concern when it comes to people being harassed at the voting booth?"

Any person who values the system of democracy America enjoys and played such a central role in establishing should be at the very least concerned about this underhanded strategy. 

   Sadly, it seems as though there has always been a group of people unable to see past their prejudices, adamant that they alone are aware of the truth of events, and therefore have the right to determine the progress of millions. The process of vote suppression is a very subtle one, a stratagem adopted due to the obsolete, blatant quality of stealing votes or directly cheating the system to boost vote count. Instead of trying to increase a candidate's numbers, vote suppression calls for reducing the opponent's, or making it more difficult for people to vote in choice areas in order to tip the balance in battleground states. The forms this process can take are legion, from invalidating an individual's voter registration form due to trivial details, to reducing the number and accessibility of polls, even to discarding thousands of registrations because of "malfunctions", which, though sorted out later, prevent those people from voting. An excerpt from a CNN article paints a vivid picture of the sort of tactics officials can employ: 

"'This office has received notification from the state of Georgia indicating that you are not a citizen of the United States and therefore, not eligible to vote,' a letter from the Fulton County Department of Registration and Elections said. But Berry is a U.S. citizen, born in Boston, Massachusetts. She has a passport and a birth certificate to prove it. The letter, which was dated October 2, gave her a week from the time it was dated to prove her citizenship. There was a problem, though -- the letter was postmarked October 9."

Later in that same article the situation was elaborated on: 

"'What most people don't know is that every year, elections officials strike millions of names from the voter rolls using processes that are secret, prone to error and vulnerable to manipulation,' said Wendy Weiser, an elections expert with New York University's Brennan Center for Justice."

Obviously, records will need to be updated prior to elections, and modifications to the lists of eligible voters is not inherently suspicious, but the danger lies in using those same updates as an excuse to meddle with the "fabric of democracy", as McCain so eloquently puts it (albeit in the wrong context). 

   Personally, I cannot express in mere word the disgust I feel towards those who perpetrate vote suppression, as it is such a shameless manifestation of greed, perhaps one of human beings' most prevalent and base vices. The greed is not even material, (a type of compulsion which I believe to be more easily excusable and evolutionarily justified) but a sickening perceived superiority which manifests as a refusal to consider the opinions of others valuable. I believe that such an activity should be an imprisonable offense, (perhaps it already is, I am not quite sure) and that courts should give serious consideration to the death penalty during the judicial process.

A brief analysis of the 2008 presidential debates and their historical context

The recent presidential debates between John McCain and Barack Obama covered a wide range of pressing topics, from foreign energy policy to health care and financial programs. The upcoming election is sure to be a pivotal moment in the history of our country, if the tense atmosphere and momentous challenges facing our nation are anything to go by. Therefore, the debates were an excellent opportunity to allow the candidates a chance to speak directly to the American people in a Q&A format, a style that makes it far more straightforward to judge the character of a candidate, a feat made impossible by the prepared quality of almost every politician's public statements. Another useful aspect of the debate prompts is their focus on the important issues of the day, providing more in-depth and timely summaries of the candidate's plans, and allowing them to directly address the merits and shortcomings of each others proposals. 

The impacts of the Internet on Democracy in America

The Internet. Arguably one of mankind's most epic achievements, both in principle and effect. It has made possible countless advances of science, economics, education, philosophy, and almost any other facet of modern life one cares to name. With it, we have become a species united by our pursuit of efficiency, understanding, and order. It is a jewel of human creativity, born from the crushing weight of our collective intellects and the white heat of our insatiable curiosity. 

However, just as any natural gem, it serves to magnify our most crippling vices to the same degree as our most philanthropic aspirations. Whichever way your opinions lean, there is no doubt that the Internet has impacted numerous aspects of our society in the few years since its inception, and will likely continue to do so for many years of the foreseeable future. At this point I will implore the reader (most likely my teacher) to consider the staggering scale of the intellectual labyrinth posed by this prompt, the manifold paths one could explore in the process of answering it, the depth of research necessary to adequately pursue even one of those, and the amount of semi-educated guesswork I will be forced to employ in attempt to offset my lack of hard evidence. If the reader can bear all of this in mind while unraveling this blog entry, then hopefully you will understand why it demonstrates such a poverty of reason. One of the most profound of the internet's nearly infinite effects was the radical shift in cultural values that seemed to develop on par with its growth. It seems (to my admittedly shallow understanding of social history) that with the advent of the internet and its capability for near-instant communication, cultural values have diminished. I cannot say if this is a boon or tragedy, but it seems apparent how the personal interactions and experiences that ruled social behavior for centuries have diminished alongside the advance of technology. When America was in the midst of its struggle with England and the Constitution was conceived, the majority of people cultivated a rural lifestyle, in which information transfer was confined to the physical, such as writ or word of mouth. The effects brought on by the absence such a prevalent aspect of human social structure are unclear, but we can always postulate. Perhaps before the internet people's opinions were formed by their own conscience and familial influence, whereas afterwords they had access to  

Newspaper project reflection

- Transcript of fourth Lincoln-Douglas debate

This project (for any reading this besides by teacher) was one in which we were divvied into groups, assigned one of the Lincoln-Douglas senatorial debates, and commanded to collaborate and produce the front page of an imaginary newspaper that came out the day after our particular debate. My group got debate #4, which took place in beautiful Charleston, and decided that we each (it was a group of four) had to write at least one news-style article, which was a novel experience in principle. Before I embark on the irreversible voyage of reflective invective, I will furnish my unknown reader with a few choice excerpts from my compilation of day-to-day work logs.

Oct 6, 2008

"Today I read some of the debate and took notes on newspaper format. I also spoke with my group members and we started deciding on the nuances of our approach, a setback compounded by the absence of a group member."

That was written on the first day of the project, when we were still hashing out our plan. The rest of the in-progress logs are equally (and perhaps even more) boring and uninformative, so I will skip to the log of the last day when we were asked to reflect on our contributions.

Oct 14, 2008

"My article could have better conveyed the topic if I had read more of the debate transcript and used more quotes. I was unsatisfied with the final draft, and if I read [my article] in a real newspaper I would probably cancel my subscription."

As you can see, the article I wrote did not appease the demanding linguistic critic in me, though the same is true for every other article I read. This leads me to believe that writing dynamically about any topic that took place over a hundred years ago is an impossibility, and my dissatisfaction is not solely attributable to my own shortcomings. Despite it's outcome, the project involved useful and interesting writing strategies, namely writing in a newspaper format, which is radically different than any other style I can think of. Obviously this sort of knowledge will prove useful in future writing endeavors, for myself and all of my classmates. One project in particular that I foresee to have roots in the recent newspaper project is the upcoming water-quality project, in which we will analyze, among other things, the importance of our local oceanic ecosystem, how our activities affect it, and which aquatic zones are cleanest for swimmers and surfers. We are going to compile this data into some sort of informative publication which we will presumably issue to people due to the recent dearth of government funded water quality tests. Due to the public nature of this publication, it is essential that our writing, editing, photographical, and formatting skills be honed to their very highest levels in order to avoid the unremitting shame that would fall on our school as a result of lax work standards.

This is the article in question (please bear in mind that it is meant to be part of an 1858 newspaper):

Stephen Douglas focuses on defending against Lincoln and Trumbull at the Charlston senatorial debate yesterday due to the severity of their withering accusations. In the time remaining, Mr. Douglas used the Supreme Court’s decision in the Dred Scott case to reinforce his arguments that the black man is inferior to the white man and undeserving of equality.

“I will not even qualify my opinion to meet the declaration of one of the Judges of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case, ‘that a negro descended from African parents, who was imported into this country as a slave is not a citizen, and cannot be.’” said Douglas, to great applause.

“I say that this Government was established on the white basis. It was made by white men, for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and never should be administered by any except white men.”

With this statement, Mr. Douglas denounced Lincoln’s stance that the phrase “all men are created equal” implies the equality of blacks as well as whites. Douglas also makes quite clear his position on the topic of slavery, and opposes Lincoln’s opening statements in which he clarified his position on the equality of blacks to whites.

“I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing.” Proclaimed Lincoln at the beginning of his speech.

In this particular utterance, Lincoln expresses his belief that although a black man is inherently unequal to a white one, he still possesses the rights inherent to human beings, which are oppressed by the practice of slavery. However, Mr. Douglas chose to devote the majority of his time to refuting the accusations leveled against him by Lincoln (who drew copious evidence from the speech of Senator Trumbull), and only excoriated Lincoln’s statements on slavery in the closing minutes of his allotted hour and a half. This strategy could be seen as either a cunning political maneuver or a significant shortcoming, depending on the political orientation of the reader.

A review of various photos and their photographical elements

This photograph of a Tibetan yak clad in a colorful and utilitarian regalia demonstrates reasonable aptitude with a camera. You can see how the photographer utilized the dynamic background to full effect by employing the rule of thirds.

The rule of thirds

The picture is not focused merely on the yak - however vibrant it's saddle may be - but on an artistic amalgam of yak and environment (presumably some isolated Himalayan vista), the latter of which is certainly entrancing enough to equal or exceed the inherent splendor held by this yak and its distinctive trappings. There are a few constructive criticisms that come to mind when I contemplate this image, such as the position of the photographer. If this unnamed individual had moved a little closer and managed to fit the yak's face into the frame, while simultaneously capturing the spellbinding background and lively getup, the picture would be stupendously more aesthetically pleasing. I scavenged this remarkable photograph from the web site Tibetan Train Travel, which can be viewed using this simple link.

I was struck by this highly expressive photograph of a hippo while I perused the many pages of Wildlife-photo.org. Based on my impromptu understanding of photography, I would say that this is a spectacular example of a picture. Clearly visible is the photographer's talent for the use of the rule of thirds, depth of field, camera position, color, and doubtless many other obscure bits of photographical protocol which, taken together, dramatically enhance the appeal of the image. With but a passing glance, one can discern how the position of the gaping maw is roughly aligned with a part of the rule of thirds (as shown above), and that the eye is also along a line, but centered, indicating that the focal point of the image is intended to be the yawning abyss of pink flesh, fearsome tusks, and ghastly nubs of blackened molar that is the mouth of a grown hippopotamus, or Hippopotamus Amphibius (from Greek). Also apparent is the use of depth of field, where the opposite bank and farthest hippo head fade into indistinction, imparting a sense of realism to the picture, making it seem almost like a window.

Lincoln-Douglas debate #4

 

  

  The debate me and my group was assigned was the fourth, which took place in Charleston, Illinois. This particular debate was largely confined to the politicians hurling accusations at one another and defending against their opponents verbal attacks. Lincoln began with a statement clarifying his position on the equality of African Americans, followed by a long-winded accusation of conspiracy, drawing copious amounts of evidence from the speeches of one Senator Trumbull. Douglas then spent the majority of his hour and a half carefully and methodically refuting every scrap of the accusations leveled against him, time he studded with similar stabs at Lincoln's credibility.  I can scarcely comprehend what qualities a person could possess that would enable them to speak before an audience of over 10,000 eager listeners for over an hour uninterrupted. The mind boggles when one considers that in order to effectively answer their opponent's arguments (which is of course the whole point of a debate) the speaker could not read from a script or rehearse their performance very far past their opening statement. Most unfortunately, this massive and intricate tapestry of vocal performance had to be read and digested by my mind, a task that would undoubtedly give any human organ a cataclysmic case of indigestion. It may come as no surprise then as I assure the reader that the transcript of this debate was one of the most dreadfully boring pieces of literature ever to gain the dubious honor of being chopped up in my hippocampus and filed away among the metaphorical shelves of my short-term memory.

 However, upon completion of this near-superhuman feat, I was dropped head-first into a fathomless ocean of purest contemplation, from which I could clearly discern the profound distinctions between the debate format used in the time of Abraham Lincoln and that of our current presidential debates. In 1858, speakers were assigned great blocks of stage time, which they used to explain to the public their merits and those of their beliefs. In today's format, speakers are given questions and a time limit with which to explain how they view the issue in question and how their presidential regime would address each problem. It is not up to me to determine the format we should use, but I think that both have inherent strengths and weaknesses. On the one hand, an unregulated chunk of time poses the threat of evasion of the important issues, but it allows the candidates to go into greater detail on the nuances of their particular approach. The current format assumes the viewer to possess at least a rudimentary knowledge of current affairs, which may not always be the case, but the Q and A style allows a greater coverage of topics, both major and minor, in addition to keeping the speaker on topic.

Possible demographic ramifications of the upcoming election

Perhaps the most obvious controversy that could result from the elections is one of race. As is well known, if Barack Obama is elected for president he will be the first African American president in American history. For most, this merely adds to the gravity and historical significance of the election, but for others it may represent a more personal significance. As may or may not be widely known, racism is a fact of life in many regions of the country, as we as a class were shown in the assigned chapter "Dying for Dixie". How the discriminatory beliefs of some might manifest as a result of the possible election of an African American remains to be seen, though racism is almost never a polite and respectful conviction. On the other hand, there may be certain demographic groups that associate more strongly with a candidate, resulting in bias of varying degrees. An example of this could be Sarah Palin and her constant allusions to "hockey moms", or John McCains venerable age and combat experiences, or even, as mentioned above, Barack Obama's race. It is perhaps inevitable that presidential candidates will garner sympathy from different slices of the American demographic pie graph, but this election deserves special consideration due to the strength of people's emotions and the tense atmosphere surrounding this "fork in the road" of economic, local, and foreign policy.

Relevance of a landmark supreme court case: Brown vs. Board of Education

- USA Today current school segregation article by Annette Fuentes March 13, 2007

- Earl Warren biography

Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) was a huge step towards the dream of an unsegregated nation, and as such its repercussions can be felt to this day. Prior to the supreme court’s ruling, the education of black children was conducted in vastly inferior conditions to that of white children, if even allowed by law.

The case was a turning point for America, because it preceded and hastened the civil rights act of 1964, and overruled the previous case Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896), which made “separate but equal” the norm in American society. Of course the argument could be (and was) made that “separate but equal” is a contradiction in terms, especially in the case of education. The court used the process of Judicial Review to overturn the precedent set by Plessy vs. Ferguson (as mentioned above), and the case was combined with four others: Briggs vs. Elliott (filed in South Carolina), Davis vs. County School Board of Prince Edward County (filed in Virginia), Gebhart vs. Belton (filed in Delaware), and Bolling vs. Sharpe (filed in Washington D.C.). The supreme court’s decision ushered in an age of integrated school systems, which in turn contributed to the desegregation of the nation because from that point on protests against racial discrimination grew steadily more impassioned and effective, assisted in no small part by Martin Luther King Jr..

One need only consider the possible consequences for modern America had this case not passed to gain an understanding of its importance. Where would we be today if Brown vs. Board of Education had never seen the light of day? The rich tapestry of history always looks simple in hindsight, but it is impossible to accurately and effectively postulate the path events would have conspired to lead us down had a certain critical juncture of yore failed to manifest. Perhaps the relatively equal racial playing field we all (for the most part) know and love would never have materialized. Maybe it would have actually regressed to the state it was before the Civil war, or turned upside-down and subjected the historically “superior” white man to the harsh vagaries of unreasoning hatred he so often visited on his perceived inferiors.

Amid all the to-do about past injustices, it is easy to overlook the implications of the closest modern equivalent to slavery; sweatshops, and the role developed nations (like America) play in their perpetuation. It is true that the practice of outsourcing pays its laborers, and therefore is not technically slavery, but we must ask ourselves: does this slight difference truly makes it that much more morally acceptable? Acceptable enough for America; the land of the free and the home of the brave, to prop up and encourage sweatshop labor, essentially just a step down from the now-outlawed practices that are simultaneously the foundation of our nation and a terrible stain in our history books? Paying workers a miniscule fraction of what their work is worth while they labor in appalling conditions mass producing almost everything we need simply because no laws explicitly forbid it is a state of affairs nearly as alarming to me as studying our country’s checkered past. I see it as a mere extension of the mindset that promoted racial discrimination and slavery within our own borders, differing only by location. Certainly it has been curbed somewhat from the extremes of segregative passion that flourished in the 1800’s, but the concept of heaping all of a country’s difficult manual labor on the members of a foreign nation still smacks of prejudice.

Sadly, racial integration was not unanimously embraced by the white public, perhaps an inevitable by-product of centuries of deeply entrenched racism and the leisure afforded by free labor. In several cases it was taken to extremes, such as Senator Harry F. Byrd's Massive Resistance movement which called for, among other things, closing schools rather than integrating them, or Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus mobilizing his national guard to prevent African Americans from attending Little Rock High School. As we look back into the piebald annals of the past, we must strive to grow and learn from them, for truly our record of history is the only thing capable of shielding us from the darkest depths of savage barbarity, for we as a species possess the means for both appalling cruelty and uplifting benevolence.

(I know the sources are messed up but I can't fathom how to fix them)

"Brown v. Board of Education." Brownvboard. Brown Foundation. 2 Oct. 2008

.

"Brown v. Board of Education." Wikipedia. 1 Oct. 2008

.

"Findlaw/Cases and Codes." Findlaw. 2 Oct. 2008

<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=163&invol=537>.

"Briggs v. Elliott (1954)." Usca. 2 Oct. 2008

.

"Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, VA.." Brownvboard. Brown Foundation. 2 Oct. 2008

.