So as we are finishing up with our group papers, I was thinking about how our group went about the writing process, and was wondering if other groups were similar or different. Professor Myers suggested to our group that we write together, by sitting down and talking aloud while assigning one person to dictate what’s being said. And to be honest, we tried that and it didn’t work. With four people talking, thinking, and trying to organize thoughts into a coherent essay, there’s no way it’s not going to be messy. We had our best success by each writing separate sections, then putting them together and editing it then. I know that runs the risk of it seeming a bit “choppy”, but I just don’t see how a twenty page paper can be written together. Do any other groups write pieces separately, or was anyone able to successfully group write? And if so, how did you go about doing it?
So after class today when we talked about exhibits at the Smithsonian museums, and how scientists have to find a balance between factual and intriguing, I found this article about Nintendo 3DSes being used at museums in France! For $6.50 you can rent a Nintendo 3DS for a few hours, and it provides a 3-D interactive map as well as an audio guided tour. It has a built in GPS to tell you exactly where you are, and figure out where you need to go.
While obviously not groundbreaking technology, I thought it was fascinating how they are now incorporating something so modern and technical into one of the most famous museums in the world, with works of art that are hundreds of years old. It’s a weird mix of past and present! I went to the Louvre a couple years ago, and the thought of hundreds of people strolling around with their Nintendo 3Ds just seems a bit odd to me. Anyway, I thought it was an interesting story that definitely relates to what we were talking about in class today. Even though the Nintendos aren’t exactly an exhibit, I believe it was a way for the museum to gain more interest from people, especially kids, and to incorporate new technology into an “ancient” place.
Hey! So Nasa and General Motors have collaborated to create a “robot glove”. It was reportedly inspired by the humanoid robot in space. The glove, known as the Human Grasp Assist, is expect to give astronauts a “stronger grip while reducing the risk of receptive stress injuries”. So astronauts will be stronger, more effective, more time efficient, and suffer less injuries. This sounds great! The glove currently weighs around two pounds, but new, lighter models are currently being worked on right now.
Now, I am not someone who gets weirded out by technological advances, but I wasn’t even aware that we had a robot working in space! And I don’t know if any of you have seen I Robot, but robots can seem a bit creepy! Do you think that the use of this “robot glove”, will just begin the transformation of humans into more mechanized beings? Do any of you believe that, in the future, human beings will start being implanted with these “robotic enhancements”? And if so, do you welcome this change eagerly, seeing the possibilities that this new technology could afford us? Or do you see it as interfering too much with the natural course of life?
Hey everyone! So this blog post is not about actual Baby Mamas. But if you have seen the move Baby Mama with Tina Fey, then you know it’s about a supposed infertile women using surrogacy to fulfill her dream of being a mother. Surrogacy is a relatively recent method of creating a family, and evokes mixed feelings and concerns from people. However, it can currently take years for a woman to be able to adopt a child, and if she can not get pregnant on her own, should she be forced to never have children?
Stem Cell Research has been a very controversial issue here in America in the past few decades. I was reading the Blog “Popular Science” when I came upon an article titled “Scientists use stem cells to generate human eggs in the lab”. So this could potentially mean that one day, scientists could remove stem cells from woman with fertility problems, and create and develop the eggs in a laboratory. This also could open up possibilities for research of the effect of nutrition and various medicines on the eggs.
I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with Stem Cell Research, I merely think it is fascinating that science has come so far in recent years. I’m also very interested in hearing what other people have to think about the future of Stem Cell Research, and various methods of becoming parents? Do you agree with all of these alternative methods to the traditional pregnancy? Or do you find it all a little Sci-Fi and out of the ordinary?
Hey. So in the “Why I Don’t Read the Links you Send Me” blog we had to read the other day, it talked about trending medical science, and diet rules, and how they usually tend to be crap. While the author’s position is probably correct, I still enjoy reading Yahoo’s latest on best foods to keep you energized, or the best remedies for my skin. I tend to fall prey to these “of the moment” trends, as I am always hopeful for that next quick fix.
Lately, at least back in Atlanta (where I’m from), a trend has formed of a new type of exercise program, Crossfit. Most of you probably know it, but if you don’t, it’s a high intensity twenty minute workout with the goal of completing as many rounds of the “Workout of the Day” in the twenty minutes. I have many friends who have done Crossfitt, and within a month have completely changed their bodies.
That’s why yesterday, I was surprised to read an article on Yahoo about how Crossfit is total crap, and that’s is sort of a weird cult-like program. The claims were that it was dangerous, ineffective, and totally unpersonalized to the individual. So if one person was hoping to shed fifty pounds, and another was trying to bulk up, they would do the exact same exercises. I have thought about trying Crossfit myself, as it seems to be so effective. However, if people are saying it’s dangerous and not worth my time, what’s a girl to do?
Now, the point of my blog is not to debate Crossfit, cause that’s probably not something we can all relate to. I just wanted to see if other people in the class also look at the daily articles on news websites, and read on the latest trends. Is there anything you’ve found that conflicts with something you do, or that’s part of your daily routine? With all these conflicting ideas and articles out there, it’s hardly easy to figure out who’s the real expert and who’s not.
Hey everyone! So today’s class on social influences on science reminded me of my Biological Anthropology class, and the debate we had in last week’s lab. We were supposed to read two articles, one supporting intelligent design, and one a direct response to that article, in favor of evolution. After discussing the pros and cons of both articles, we started to talk about whether or not school systems should teach one, both, or neither of these theories. Most of my class decided that evolution should be the main “creation” story taught in science class, seeing as it is the only theory with “tangible evidence”. And when some students spoke out in favor of intelligent design being taught, the problem arose of, “Well, it’s not technically a science, so where in the curriculum can you put it?”. And, “If you choose to teach one of the intelligent design stories, you have to them all.” My school taught both evolution and the Bible’s creation story, and my teachers said the two could coincide quite easily. But, it was easy to see that some kids were relatively offended by others’ lack of respect for their various beliefs. While technically not a science, a lot of the creation stories are widely accepted beliefs on how life itself came about.
In a nation so diverse in religions and beliefs, is there a place in the school system for intelligent design? Or should they stick to the more tangible idea of evolution? And furthermore, should all public schools have a uniform curriculum on evolution vs. intelligent design? Or could the curriculum be more catered to the specific neighborhoods/areas….ex: Could a public high school with majority Christians focus more on the Bible’s creation story?