Geo-engineering article

For my article I will be writing about Geo engineering. First I will start by introducing the reader to the concept of geo engineering, that humans can change the earth's atmosphere to counteract global warming. I will present various ideas that have been come up with by geo engineers, and what inspired these ideas (like the volcano that threw sulphates into the upper atmosphere and lowered earth's temperature for a year).
The article will then talk about the present and future potential of such projects, and about the pros and cons of a variety of geo engineering ideas. In Nature journal I found an article speaking very highly of geo engineering, and talking about potential tests they might run to test their ideas. In the economist magazine i found and article which brings up two scientific papers that talk about the impracticality of geo engineering ideas. Finally, i found a youtube video with a guy (some professor) explaining a variety of concepts in geo engineering and talking strictly about their projected environmental impacts.
I will try to use a lot of creddible scientific evidence to present both sides, and will try to make it as balanced a paper as possible, not saying at any point if geo-engineering is a feasible or worthwhile endeavor for humanity to pursue

that quote by that guy

ok, so I'm not exactly sure what Charles Bazerman is saying in this article. From what I got it seems like he's saying that due to this new wave of scientific journalism we are learning about, we are getting a deeper insight into how knowledge such as theories and technology is created. I am pretty sure that when he says public statements he means the information that is released to the public, like for example when Dolly the sheep was cloned, it was released to the public, and that was the public statement. What the new scientific journalism does is let us see how we got to the point where Dolly the sheep could be cloned.
The quote "In helping show the construction of the public moment, insights into private activities do not deconstruct, devaluate, or invalidate the public moment," Mr Bazerman seems to think that some people believe that by looking at the process that lead to the public statement, for example looking at the research done by individual scientists in order to clone dolly the sheep, would take away from the power of the statement that a sheep was cloned. In an overly verbose way Mr. Bazerman is simply arguing that seeing what goes on behind the scenes takes away from the quality of a movie. If I am reading this guy correctly, he is arguing a point that no one is even arguing against. People love taking things apart and seeing what they are made of (be it in a literal sense or in a figurative sense such as looking into what went into making a scientific discovery). This process gives them a real appreciation for the work and complexity that went into creating that public moment.

response to recylcing article

The article I wrote about the recycling was bursting with rhetoric. The one clear purpose of the paper was to state that many of the 'green' steps being taken at the school are being sensationalized and blown out of proportion as far as how green they really are. The audience of this paper is the same people who are the audience for the articles about how revolutionary our 'green' advancements are, so primarily students of the college. The purpose of the article is to make the audience stop for a second and think about how much of a difference what they are doing is making. This article is written in a very facetious and patronizing tone tone, but it is done to convey the point that these 'green' advances aren't enough, or even for that matter 'green'. Some might say that you have to start somewhere, but what I'm really trying to convey is that we are approaching green in completely the wrong way. No one has ever complained about the burden of having to split their recycling into the two bins, and no one has ever used the ubike instead of a car. The real green should come from promoting less consumption, a more localized economy, and a school system that really makes an effort to save paper by using technology instead of just recycling paper that shouldn't have been printed on anyways.
The language in the article is definitely loaded. Sarcastic phrases are used a lot throughout the article, and it is thus written in a very informal way, since it is hard to write formally while being sarcastic.
As far as ethos, pathos and logos, i feel the article is very heavy on pathos. Most people feel very strongly for the green movement and in this article I appeal to the audiences feelings about the green movement, and instead of trying to change their feelings I try to redirect them and make them think green in a more logical way. This also brings up the logos part of the article. By pointing out the most prominent things that all this great recycling we do goes to (starbucks sleeves and tote bags), one questions whether there is an even better way than recycling to go green.

Lisa Jackson

Lisa Jackson is the newly appointed head of the Environmental Protection Agency. She was born in Philadelphia and grew up in New Orleans. She got her bachelors in Chemical Engineering from Tulane and her masters in chemical engineering from Princeton. Before being appointed to the EPA she worked for the NJDEP. She was in charge of improving New Jersey's water and air and preserving its natural and historic resources. She was critisized by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility who claimed that "DEP employees describe Ms. Jackson as employing a highly politicized approach to decision-making that resulted in suppression of scientific information, issuance of gag orders and threats against professional staff members who dared to voice concerns." (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (December 8, 2008). WHY LISA JACKSON SHOULD NOT RUN EPA — Disastrous Record in New Jersey Bodes Ill for Reforming EPA)

One small step for recycling, one giant leap for lazy people

Recently, the University of Miami changed its recycling system from a two stream system which involves people having to separate their bottles and paper, into a one stream system which accepts both types of waste. This is a huge step which will completely change the campus. Up until now recycling required the back breaking labor of sorting your cans and bottles and separating them from your papers. The fact that so much labor had to go into recycling meant that it was unrealistic for anyone other than elitist liberals and tree huggers. This new innovation allows your average Joe Six Pack to finally take part in the green movement as well.

The recycling from the University of Miami campus gets taken to a recycling plant in Pembroke Pines where someone sorts out the recycling. The plastic bottles can look forward to a future as some form of bag or tote bag that gives smug people a sense of self satisfaction because they feel like they made a difference by buying a bag which they probably didn't need anyways. The paper can look forward to a promising future as a sleeve for a five dollar coffee at Starbucks.

The new innovation in garbage disposal is just one of the ways in which the University of Miami is trying to promote its green image. GreenU recently said that Ubikes were an initiative to make the campus greener. It seems like the general consensus on campus is that students are not using the bikes instead of cars or anything else. A nice side effect of the bikes, however, has been that many students with early classes are able to get a nice early adrenaline rush as a biker tries to make an impossible pass on the narrow campus paths.