Jeph Jacques's comics discussion forums

  • 27 Nov 2021, 09:12
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Environmental Science Question  (Read 3724 times)

Xcarissa

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Environmental Science Question
« on: 05 Aug 2008, 20:48 »

[EDIT]

What do you think is the worst environmental problem in the world today?

Thanks, QC Forum.
« Last Edit: 05 Aug 2008, 22:11 by Xcarissa »
Logged
No.

Thlayli

  • Guest

At what point does the scientific method come into play?
Logged

Ozymandias


Camera Buff (Amator) is a 1979 Polish film written and directed by Krzysztof Kieślowski about a humble factory worker whose newfound hobby, amateur film, becomes an obsession and transforms his modest and contented life.

The film begins with a dream about a hawk eating a chicken.

Factory worker Filip Mosz (Jerzy Stuhr) is a nervous new father and a doting husband when he begins filming his daughter's first days with a just-bought 8mm movie camera. He tells his wife and believes that he now has everything he ever wanted since his youth as an orphan, but when the local Communist Party boss asks him to film an upcoming celebration, his fascination with the possibilities of film begins to transform his life.

When they see his edited short film of the conference/celebration, his superiors find his shot of a pigeon useless and his shots of several negotiators at a business meeting too probing. He submits the film to a festival in another town and eventually gains the attention of a lovely local film critic.

His responsibilities to his wife and daughter slip off his radar as his gaze fixes on Anna Wlodarcz (a young, self-described "amatorka" who encourages Filip's filmmaking), various activities he films, and the world of cinephiles.

The Krakow TV station airs Filip's film about a little person ("midget" or "dwarf" in the English subtitles) who works at the factory and another one about the misallocated town renovation funds. Filip's boss gives him a talking: work on the new nursery school will have to stop because of his expose, and Stasio will lose his job.

After that, Filip gets the canister for his as-yet undeveloped new film about the brickyard, opens it and tosses the film out to be exposed to the light. Alone at home, his wife and daughter long gone, Filip turns his camera on himself.

Camera Buff explores censorship in Communist Poland and its repression of the individual's expression of his observations. Filip also confronts the consequences of a man who discovers new possibilities and finds his former world, which had been so fulfilling before he'd discovered more, rendered dull, old, and limited.

Kieslowski emphasizes the power of film through various scenes in Camera Buff. Filip's moviemaking allows his grieving friend to watch a short clip of his late mother waving from a window and of himself cheerfully driving a hearst and waving to the camera. When he films the story of a midget factory worker and then shows him the result, the worker is overcome with emotion by Filip's ability to give voice and an arc to an otherwise unexemplary life. Filip finds that with its ability to create comes film's ability to destroy when he tries to air a film clip of his which aims to quietly expose Party corruption. The clip turns out to be misinformed and results in the dismissal of one of his supporters from his job, an unfortunate consequence of his uninformed reporting, the Party's secrecy, and Communist Poland's culture of censorship.

The film ends with Filip turning the camera on himself, realizing too late that all along he should have reflected on the consequences of his camera obsession on himself, his life, and his family.

The New York Times' Vincent Canby argued that " [much] of the film means to be uproariously emotional, but the events we see seldom justify all the overwrought reactions. Mr. Kieslowski also appears to suggest that art - in this case movie making - must be a process by which the artist consumes the raw materials of his experience and then spits them out as finished art, leaving the people around him in the state of gnawed beef bones. This is a vast oversimplification of the creative process and is probably only applicable, really, to the second-rater."

I hope this helps!
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,330

I'm just going to say it and I apologize in advance if you think I'm being a jerk for it, but I have never once seen a thread on here related to homework do well. That would be an interesting topic to talk about, but we're not here to complete your homework. Also, asking the internet is not "observing or experimenting." Science is fun! Go out and observe next time.
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

IronOxide

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,467

I am mostly afraid of giant Mexicans.



Horrifying.
Logged
Quote from: Wikipedia on Elephant Polo
No matches have been played since February 2007, however, when an elephant, protesting a bad call by the referee, went on a rampage during a game, injuring two players and destroying the Spanish team's minibus

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,330
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

Eris

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,985
  • bzzzz

Personally, I believe ecofascists are the worst environmental problem these days.

We better watch out!
Logged
Quote from: Drunk Pete
MACHINS CON ESFU EPETE

Thlayli

  • Guest

Personally, I believe ecofascists are the worst environmental problem these days.

We better watch out!

Wow, I didn't realize ANUS won an award for best nihilist website. Those guys don't know how not to rock.
Logged

SimpsonsParadox

  • Guest

Serious Answer: The worst environmental problem today is misinformation amongst the populace. Nuclear Power, Alternative Power, Local Grown vs Large Farm, Frankenstein Crops, etc. seem to have a large cloud of, to put it simply, stupid hanging over them. If 'regular' people were to become more informed about those (And other) topics, I think we could all make rational decisions for the benefit of both humanity and the environment.

Non Serious Answer: While I'm dreaming, I might as well ask for a Unicorn and wings. Also, a quick disclaimer: any results you get from the forum will be heavily biased, towards age (We're all probably younger than 30), sex (Predominantly male), race (Predominantly white), under coverage (You're only asking people who have access to the internet), voluntary response (We can chose if we want to answer or not, which generally leads to only those with an interest or knowledge in the area to respond and not the 'common man' if I may use that term), and time (Its late at night, which leaves out people who aren't insomniacs and those who work night shifts.) Extrapolating (IE: Extending) whatever result you gain from this thread to make any conclusion about what the 'population' at whole believes would be amazingly bad.
Logged

Eris

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,985
  • bzzzz

Also, most of the answers will not be serious, because people on the internet suck and generally don't care if you haven't done your homework.


I know I don't care about your assignment! The internet (especially a random forum) is probably not the best place to try and get proper information in a short period of time and expect it to be high quality. Maybe if you asked people you know online rather than people who don't know you or care about your life then you may get better results.
« Last Edit: 05 Aug 2008, 21:26 by Eris »
Logged
Quote from: Drunk Pete
MACHINS CON ESFU EPETE

Ozymandias


Seriously, I am beloved and adored and these fuckers wouldn't do my homework for me if I asked.

If game theory were applied to these forums, it would be a negative sum.
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

ViolentDove

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,418

Serious answer: You need a much larger sample size. Such a small number of samples is meaningless in any quantitative way! Somewhere over one thousand is a good rule of thumb for these types of surveys.

Logged
With cake ownership set to C and cake consumption set to K, then C + K = 0.  So indeed as one consumes a cake, one simultaneously deprives oneself of cake ownership. 

Xcarissa

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13

Yeah... well, thanks.

For those who seem to be wondering, what's really going on is that, the assignment was to make a hypothesis, which is, "People percieve [problem] as the worst environmental problem today". I put in Overpopulation, so what I need to do now, in the "collecting data to support the hypothesis" part of the scientific experiment, is to ask a minimum of 30 people what they think the worst problem is. It was assigned Monday, and due tomorrow, and I don't have enough friends and family to finish it, and I know the internet is pretty damn big. So. Here I am. Would it... would it have worked better if I took out the part about homework and just opened the thread as a discussion... type... thing?
Logged
No.

Ozymandias


If you had started it that way, probably, yes. Tom Sawyer gets more done pretending to have fun than begging for help.

Also, what you say about his company is what you say about society.
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

SimpsonsParadox

  • Guest

You would of probably gotten a tad bit 'better' responses (Although how much better is debatable.) The internet is big, but it generally follows biases (Young, Liberal, White, College Educated) that make using it as a sole (or major) source of data tricky at best. For what you're describing, however, the internet should work fine, so long as you note somewhere where your data came from.

If I may, however, suggest one small change: Don't inform us of what your hypothesis is. Stating your hypothesis introduces its own layer of biases (You might 'lead' a few people into giving an answer that they normally wouldn't give.) Merely stating the question (IE: What do you believe is the worst environment problem in the world today) and recording your results not only eliminates a source of bias (Always a good thing) but makes it slightly more simplistic for people to understand and answer.
Logged

Xcarissa

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #15 on: 05 Aug 2008, 22:12 »

Thanks for the help, Paradox. I'm gonna go off in search of another forum with a generic-topic subforum and try them with your suggested changes.
Logged
No.

Verergoca

  • Cthulhu f'tagn
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 545
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #16 on: 06 Aug 2008, 00:56 »

Does this mean i dont have to type up a long insane rambling on how i percieve bunnies to be the Greatest Threat To Mankind, and All Its Subsidaries?
Logged
Quote from: Dr. Sidney Freeman
Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and slide on the ice.

Hat

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,628
  • bang bang a suckah MC shot me down

If you had started it that way, probably, yes. Tom Sawyer gets more done pretending to have fun than begging for help.

Also, what you say about his company is what you say about society.

God you are just so fucking rad. I would kiss you if we weren't both so strenuously straight.
Logged
Quote from: Emilio
power metal set in the present is basically crunk

Runner4406pack

  • Emoticontraindication
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #18 on: 08 Aug 2008, 10:32 »

Simple question simple answer.  Biomagnification/amplification which ever term you would like to use
Logged

waterloosunset

  • Bizarre cantaloupe phobia
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #19 on: 08 Aug 2008, 11:02 »

Cows. They pump out tonnes of ozone destroying methane. Kill them all, and ship the steak to my house ta.
Logged

tommydski

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,064
    • Pocket Jury
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #20 on: 08 Aug 2008, 11:24 »

I was thinking that the biggest environmental problem is a lack of serious understanding and focus on the nature of the world in which we live and how our lives impact the planet we live on. This is largely because literally every government in the world is tied by the day to day bureaucracy of running countries full of of people who are the product of the system described above. As you can see, it's a self-defeating vicious circle. People are prepared to pay taxes which go towards things which effect their world directly - that is to say constructs which are local and highly visible. The average citizen of most developed or indeed developing countries are concerned with the minutiae of day to day existence, not the far reaching effects of global consequence. Each countries' budget for environmental education is always going to be pushed to the very bottom of the funding priorities because voters are understandably more concerned with things which directly influence their specific corner of the world. It isn't even apathy, just a general consensus that the global environment in general is very seldom going to be a priority for most individuals.

This answer may be both obvious and a cop out but it is also self-fulfilling. I don't know enough about the environment to answer because I am a literal example of the above construct. I am all but entirely ignorant of environmental concerns because I squandered my life on completely selfish endeavours. So there you have it - the problem is me and my ignorance.
Logged
Quote from: Ozymandias
One minute we're playing Mario Kart, the next my penis is in your mouth - it just happens.

jhocking

  • Methuselah's mentor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,414
  • Corruption City USA
    • new|Arteest
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #21 on: 08 Aug 2008, 12:13 »

Just posted this in the computer forum, but it fits here too:
http://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php/topic,20768.0.html

Chesire Cat

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,387
  • Standing proudly behind unpopular opinions
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #22 on: 08 Aug 2008, 12:41 »

The Environment

Ironically, part of the reason people dont/governments dont care is because of a lack of world unity/global identity.  Why obey the Kyoto Accord if other countries dont etc.  Basically people who hate Globalization indirectly hurt the environment by my logic.  As well, Democracy is killing the environment because sacrificing industry or shifting funds to environmental programs usually dont net results until far down the road, but have immediate effects on constituents who naturally will vote for the other guy next time around.
Logged
"In this zero sum game everything given to another, reduces me"

Thlayli

  • Guest
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #23 on: 08 Aug 2008, 13:03 »

The Environment

Ironically, part of the reason people dont/governments dont care is because of a lack of world unity/global identity.  Why obey the Kyoto Accord if other countries dont etc.  Basically people who hate Globalization indirectly hurt the environment by my logic.  As well, Democracy is killing the environment because sacrificing industry or shifting funds to environmental programs usually dont net results until far down the road, but have immediate effects on constituents who naturally will vote for the other guy next time around.

I realize I risk being kicked out by the admins for talking politics, but your post is nothing but politics. The Kyoto protocol is aimed at crippling American and other First World economies while creating loopholes so that heavily polluting, developing countries like China and India can continue raping the environment in the name of industry and GDP.
Logged

Chesire Cat

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,387
  • Standing proudly behind unpopular opinions
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #24 on: 08 Aug 2008, 13:14 »

No no no, what Im saying is because nationalism, environmental concerns are much more an Us vs Them thing.  In reality we are all on the same earth, and if we fuck up one area it impacts us all.  And generally people who are anti-globalization are very often the people who care the most about the environment.  Kyoto is just a buzz word I used to relate my point.
Logged
"In this zero sum game everything given to another, reduces me"

pwhodges

  • Admin emeritus
  • Awakened
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,930
  • I'll only say this once...
    • My home page
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #25 on: 08 Aug 2008, 13:15 »

In 50 to 100 years time, the effects of major sea-level centres (e.g. London) being irrevocably flooded out* will lead to the start of a major break-down of the global society.  The environment will kick back, and it will hurt.  My 0.02p, but I won't be around to check.


* Venice will have gone first, but we'll just say "that's a shame"...
Logged
"Being human, having your health; that's what's important."  (from: Magical Shopping Arcade Abenobashi )
"As long as we're all living, and as long as we're all having fun, that should do it, right?"  (from: The Eccentric Family )

tommydski

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,064
    • Pocket Jury
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #26 on: 08 Aug 2008, 13:16 »

To back away from problem-causing specifics for a moment, you're both right. As in, you are both presenting an aspect of the discussion which is part of the wider reasons that the Environment is likely to remain a tertiary and comparatively unpopular concern.

To give this a local and individual basis and thus avoid potentially controversial geo-political specifics, I believe both posts are an example of the trend I mentioned earlier. If one individual chooses to be active regarding environmental concerns, their actions are very likely to be undone by the disinterest or hostility of other people who have other concerns. The latter will be an absolute majority because it's easier to not give a shit about the environment. All the minority can hope for is that their conduct will eventually inspire others to follow in their wake. I think we can safely say that this approach is working very slowly if it is working at all.
Logged
Quote from: Ozymandias
One minute we're playing Mario Kart, the next my penis is in your mouth - it just happens.

Chesire Cat

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,387
  • Standing proudly behind unpopular opinions
Re: Environmental Science Question
« Reply #27 on: 08 Aug 2008, 13:27 »

Very definitely the case.  I myself was one of those, I a drop in the ocean, my actions wont mean anything kind of people.  But have moved in with an environmentally conscious person who has inspired me to make changes in my lifestyle even if they are generally small things like shutting off lights in other rooms.
Logged
"In this zero sum game everything given to another, reduces me"
Pages: [1]   Go Up