Datasets:

eastwind

/

finweb_sentences_10BT_40_char

like 0

Interactivity applied to museums can be a fairly complex concept, that could be classified in many different ways, especially if we focus the subject on the factors involved in it: info supports, space and time, resources, objectives, rhythm, intensity levels, origin, number of participants, competitive or cooperative characters, etctera. There have been various classifications from quite elaborate arguments coming from other studies and experts, but they do not give too much light to the point, really. “Museums interactivity with high” or “low interactivity Museums” what does it means? It is quite absurd in general terms, as there are interactive solutions with a single graphical question triggers a sinfn operations, while a complex “interactive machines” can solve specific issues only scores. Matt Kelm Design / Human Interactivity We can make a first classification by very basic concepts: – Interactivity by computers or electronic characters: the interpelacin with visitors to the museum is scheduled informticamente using machines. – Interactivity mechanical or manipulative characters: it is a simple interaction using mecnicas solutions, ranging from the use of springs or electrical connectors. – Interactivity of human characters: use this denomination to refer to that interaction caused by human agents either entertainers, actors, guides, etc… We will do extensive clasificacinms encompassing, one way or another, these three above, but giving them more importance to involve machines, which is what really museographer complex. Let all: 1 Interaction with information. Using simple tactile screens, joysticks, keyboards with simple programs. Modules are actually located in the halls and they often report the contents of museums (maps, works, services, etc..). They are individual use, such as vending machines in subway tickets or very similar. 2. Interaction for learning simple: respond to interactive systems uncommon, even rare, uncommon. Are machines who act with a system of unidirectional response question: the question machine, the visitor responds. It looks like the token system learning. They get outdated very quickly. 3 Interatividad based video games. Were the most complex and expensive, complicated in its maintenance, so there are usually seen frequently in museums. They are the most effective, that s because they are really interactan machines with the visitor. The future of these systems for the mus 4. Interactivity based skills each: is very old and has been practiced as a game and as training. In the field of computer sciences there are many examples, the Tetris game is one of them. 5. Based puzzles Interactivity may not be informtica base. It’s a classic game taken to the computer, there is much more to explain, we’ve all played with them. 6. Interactivity based platforms: are video games where we spent from one phase to another depending on our skills. While we are not able to overcome a phase we can not move to the next and what we do if we prove knowledge of something concrete, for example. 7. Interactivity grficas adventures in them the protagonist ESTN are you and also based on our skills. It’s like a book, but instead of reading, plotting visualize it and completing the action of the plot as we want. You can use speech, examining objects, use objects, open doors … 8 Interactivity Role Playing Game. Estbasada in RPGs, so it will be part of history. Are visible from an overhead shot. Move the characters in a scenario in which points are Sealan to perform different actions. You control all the action. 9. Interactivity strategy: from checkers or chess, for individual work shifts – a move / decision after another – also called real-time strategy with cause and effect. Its aim is to demonstrate different skills to direct operations that will lead to a logical goal. In any case, from the merely human point of view, the word is one of the best interactive tools that we have men and women to access knowledge. Thanks to the word, we can interact with us directly into a friendly environment. It is an interactivity that is based on the oral and written word. If these lines leis, estis interacting with us in some way, reacting to what we have written. Pulsaris a button to “like” or not haris, I “inscribiris to blog” or cerraris the page, it recomendaris someone. These words may trigger a large number of actions based on the word – even in a digital environment -. Many of the approaches that museums need to respond to a need for active dissemination of knowledge can be solved with the use of the word, not so much written – the huge panels filled with authentic texts are a pain – but if we can hear what is being said, what is narrated, so other people can show us and we do not know yet. There’s guides, informants, animators, actors, all professionals fantsticos can we step into a story. At the end of the road, there is nothing that can really replace person-to-person interaction, as in Love matters. SANTACANA I MESTRE, J. / MARTÍN PIÑOL. C. Manual de museografía interactiva Editorial TREA, Gijón (2010)

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://evmuseography.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mueums-9-ways-to-interact/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>_44

These words may trigger a large number of actions based on the word – even in a digital environment -.

Interactivity applied to museums can be a fairly complex concept, that could be classified in many different ways, especially if we focus the subject on the factors involved in it: info supports, space and time, resources, objectives, rhythm, intensity levels, origin, number of participants, competitive or cooperative characters, etctera. There have been various classifications from quite elaborate arguments coming from other studies and experts, but they do not give too much light to the point, really. “Museums interactivity with high” or “low interactivity Museums” what does it means? It is quite absurd in general terms, as there are interactive solutions with a single graphical question triggers a sinfn operations, while a complex “interactive machines” can solve specific issues only scores. Matt Kelm Design / Human Interactivity We can make a first classification by very basic concepts: – Interactivity by computers or electronic characters: the interpelacin with visitors to the museum is scheduled informticamente using machines. – Interactivity mechanical or manipulative characters: it is a simple interaction using mecnicas solutions, ranging from the use of springs or electrical connectors. – Interactivity of human characters: use this denomination to refer to that interaction caused by human agents either entertainers, actors, guides, etc… We will do extensive clasificacinms encompassing, one way or another, these three above, but giving them more importance to involve machines, which is what really museographer complex. Let all: 1 Interaction with information. Using simple tactile screens, joysticks, keyboards with simple programs. Modules are actually located in the halls and they often report the contents of museums (maps, works, services, etc..). They are individual use, such as vending machines in subway tickets or very similar. 2. Interaction for learning simple: respond to interactive systems uncommon, even rare, uncommon. Are machines who act with a system of unidirectional response question: the question machine, the visitor responds. It looks like the token system learning. They get outdated very quickly. 3 Interatividad based video games. Were the most complex and expensive, complicated in its maintenance, so there are usually seen frequently in museums. They are the most effective, that s because they are really interactan machines with the visitor. The future of these systems for the mus 4. Interactivity based skills each: is very old and has been practiced as a game and as training. In the field of computer sciences there are many examples, the Tetris game is one of them. 5. Based puzzles Interactivity may not be informtica base. It’s a classic game taken to the computer, there is much more to explain, we’ve all played with them. 6. Interactivity based platforms: are video games where we spent from one phase to another depending on our skills. While we are not able to overcome a phase we can not move to the next and what we do if we prove knowledge of something concrete, for example. 7. Interactivity grficas adventures in them the protagonist ESTN are you and also based on our skills. It’s like a book, but instead of reading, plotting visualize it and completing the action of the plot as we want. You can use speech, examining objects, use objects, open doors … 8 Interactivity Role Playing Game. Estbasada in RPGs, so it will be part of history. Are visible from an overhead shot. Move the characters in a scenario in which points are Sealan to perform different actions. You control all the action. 9. Interactivity strategy: from checkers or chess, for individual work shifts – a move / decision after another – also called real-time strategy with cause and effect. Its aim is to demonstrate different skills to direct operations that will lead to a logical goal. In any case, from the merely human point of view, the word is one of the best interactive tools that we have men and women to access knowledge. Thanks to the word, we can interact with us directly into a friendly environment. It is an interactivity that is based on the oral and written word. If these lines leis, estis interacting with us in some way, reacting to what we have written. Pulsaris a button to “like” or not haris, I “inscribiris to blog” or cerraris the page, it recomendaris someone. These words may trigger a large number of actions based on the word – even in a digital environment -. Many of the approaches that museums need to respond to a need for active dissemination of knowledge can be solved with the use of the word, not so much written – the huge panels filled with authentic texts are a pain – but if we can hear what is being said, what is narrated, so other people can show us and we do not know yet. There’s guides, informants, animators, actors, all professionals fantsticos can we step into a story. At the end of the road, there is nothing that can really replace person-to-person interaction, as in Love matters. SANTACANA I MESTRE, J. / MARTÍN PIÑOL. C. Manual de museografía interactiva Editorial TREA, Gijón (2010)

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://evmuseography.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mueums-9-ways-to-interact/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>_45

Many of the approaches that museums need to respond to a need for active dissemination of knowledge can be solved with the use of the word, not so much written – the huge panels filled with authentic texts are a pain – but if we can hear what is being said, what is narrated, so other people can show us and we do not know yet.

Interactivity applied to museums can be a fairly complex concept, that could be classified in many different ways, especially if we focus the subject on the factors involved in it: info supports, space and time, resources, objectives, rhythm, intensity levels, origin, number of participants, competitive or cooperative characters, etctera. There have been various classifications from quite elaborate arguments coming from other studies and experts, but they do not give too much light to the point, really. “Museums interactivity with high” or “low interactivity Museums” what does it means? It is quite absurd in general terms, as there are interactive solutions with a single graphical question triggers a sinfn operations, while a complex “interactive machines” can solve specific issues only scores. Matt Kelm Design / Human Interactivity We can make a first classification by very basic concepts: – Interactivity by computers or electronic characters: the interpelacin with visitors to the museum is scheduled informticamente using machines. – Interactivity mechanical or manipulative characters: it is a simple interaction using mecnicas solutions, ranging from the use of springs or electrical connectors. – Interactivity of human characters: use this denomination to refer to that interaction caused by human agents either entertainers, actors, guides, etc… We will do extensive clasificacinms encompassing, one way or another, these three above, but giving them more importance to involve machines, which is what really museographer complex. Let all: 1 Interaction with information. Using simple tactile screens, joysticks, keyboards with simple programs. Modules are actually located in the halls and they often report the contents of museums (maps, works, services, etc..). They are individual use, such as vending machines in subway tickets or very similar. 2. Interaction for learning simple: respond to interactive systems uncommon, even rare, uncommon. Are machines who act with a system of unidirectional response question: the question machine, the visitor responds. It looks like the token system learning. They get outdated very quickly. 3 Interatividad based video games. Were the most complex and expensive, complicated in its maintenance, so there are usually seen frequently in museums. They are the most effective, that s because they are really interactan machines with the visitor. The future of these systems for the mus 4. Interactivity based skills each: is very old and has been practiced as a game and as training. In the field of computer sciences there are many examples, the Tetris game is one of them. 5. Based puzzles Interactivity may not be informtica base. It’s a classic game taken to the computer, there is much more to explain, we’ve all played with them. 6. Interactivity based platforms: are video games where we spent from one phase to another depending on our skills. While we are not able to overcome a phase we can not move to the next and what we do if we prove knowledge of something concrete, for example. 7. Interactivity grficas adventures in them the protagonist ESTN are you and also based on our skills. It’s like a book, but instead of reading, plotting visualize it and completing the action of the plot as we want. You can use speech, examining objects, use objects, open doors … 8 Interactivity Role Playing Game. Estbasada in RPGs, so it will be part of history. Are visible from an overhead shot. Move the characters in a scenario in which points are Sealan to perform different actions. You control all the action. 9. Interactivity strategy: from checkers or chess, for individual work shifts – a move / decision after another – also called real-time strategy with cause and effect. Its aim is to demonstrate different skills to direct operations that will lead to a logical goal. In any case, from the merely human point of view, the word is one of the best interactive tools that we have men and women to access knowledge. Thanks to the word, we can interact with us directly into a friendly environment. It is an interactivity that is based on the oral and written word. If these lines leis, estis interacting with us in some way, reacting to what we have written. Pulsaris a button to “like” or not haris, I “inscribiris to blog” or cerraris the page, it recomendaris someone. These words may trigger a large number of actions based on the word – even in a digital environment -. Many of the approaches that museums need to respond to a need for active dissemination of knowledge can be solved with the use of the word, not so much written – the huge panels filled with authentic texts are a pain – but if we can hear what is being said, what is narrated, so other people can show us and we do not know yet. There’s guides, informants, animators, actors, all professionals fantsticos can we step into a story. At the end of the road, there is nothing that can really replace person-to-person interaction, as in Love matters. SANTACANA I MESTRE, J. / MARTÍN PIÑOL. C. Manual de museografía interactiva Editorial TREA, Gijón (2010)

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://evmuseography.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mueums-9-ways-to-interact/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>_46

There’s guides, informants, animators, actors, all professionals fantsticos can we step into a story.

Interactivity applied to museums can be a fairly complex concept, that could be classified in many different ways, especially if we focus the subject on the factors involved in it: info supports, space and time, resources, objectives, rhythm, intensity levels, origin, number of participants, competitive or cooperative characters, etctera. There have been various classifications from quite elaborate arguments coming from other studies and experts, but they do not give too much light to the point, really. “Museums interactivity with high” or “low interactivity Museums” what does it means? It is quite absurd in general terms, as there are interactive solutions with a single graphical question triggers a sinfn operations, while a complex “interactive machines” can solve specific issues only scores. Matt Kelm Design / Human Interactivity We can make a first classification by very basic concepts: – Interactivity by computers or electronic characters: the interpelacin with visitors to the museum is scheduled informticamente using machines. – Interactivity mechanical or manipulative characters: it is a simple interaction using mecnicas solutions, ranging from the use of springs or electrical connectors. – Interactivity of human characters: use this denomination to refer to that interaction caused by human agents either entertainers, actors, guides, etc… We will do extensive clasificacinms encompassing, one way or another, these three above, but giving them more importance to involve machines, which is what really museographer complex. Let all: 1 Interaction with information. Using simple tactile screens, joysticks, keyboards with simple programs. Modules are actually located in the halls and they often report the contents of museums (maps, works, services, etc..). They are individual use, such as vending machines in subway tickets or very similar. 2. Interaction for learning simple: respond to interactive systems uncommon, even rare, uncommon. Are machines who act with a system of unidirectional response question: the question machine, the visitor responds. It looks like the token system learning. They get outdated very quickly. 3 Interatividad based video games. Were the most complex and expensive, complicated in its maintenance, so there are usually seen frequently in museums. They are the most effective, that s because they are really interactan machines with the visitor. The future of these systems for the mus 4. Interactivity based skills each: is very old and has been practiced as a game and as training. In the field of computer sciences there are many examples, the Tetris game is one of them. 5. Based puzzles Interactivity may not be informtica base. It’s a classic game taken to the computer, there is much more to explain, we’ve all played with them. 6. Interactivity based platforms: are video games where we spent from one phase to another depending on our skills. While we are not able to overcome a phase we can not move to the next and what we do if we prove knowledge of something concrete, for example. 7. Interactivity grficas adventures in them the protagonist ESTN are you and also based on our skills. It’s like a book, but instead of reading, plotting visualize it and completing the action of the plot as we want. You can use speech, examining objects, use objects, open doors … 8 Interactivity Role Playing Game. Estbasada in RPGs, so it will be part of history. Are visible from an overhead shot. Move the characters in a scenario in which points are Sealan to perform different actions. You control all the action. 9. Interactivity strategy: from checkers or chess, for individual work shifts – a move / decision after another – also called real-time strategy with cause and effect. Its aim is to demonstrate different skills to direct operations that will lead to a logical goal. In any case, from the merely human point of view, the word is one of the best interactive tools that we have men and women to access knowledge. Thanks to the word, we can interact with us directly into a friendly environment. It is an interactivity that is based on the oral and written word. If these lines leis, estis interacting with us in some way, reacting to what we have written. Pulsaris a button to “like” or not haris, I “inscribiris to blog” or cerraris the page, it recomendaris someone. These words may trigger a large number of actions based on the word – even in a digital environment -. Many of the approaches that museums need to respond to a need for active dissemination of knowledge can be solved with the use of the word, not so much written – the huge panels filled with authentic texts are a pain – but if we can hear what is being said, what is narrated, so other people can show us and we do not know yet. There’s guides, informants, animators, actors, all professionals fantsticos can we step into a story. At the end of the road, there is nothing that can really replace person-to-person interaction, as in Love matters. SANTACANA I MESTRE, J. / MARTÍN PIÑOL. C. Manual de museografía interactiva Editorial TREA, Gijón (2010)

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://evmuseography.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mueums-9-ways-to-interact/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>_47

At the end of the road, there is nothing that can really replace person-to-person interaction, as in Love matters.

Interactivity applied to museums can be a fairly complex concept, that could be classified in many different ways, especially if we focus the subject on the factors involved in it: info supports, space and time, resources, objectives, rhythm, intensity levels, origin, number of participants, competitive or cooperative characters, etctera. There have been various classifications from quite elaborate arguments coming from other studies and experts, but they do not give too much light to the point, really. “Museums interactivity with high” or “low interactivity Museums” what does it means? It is quite absurd in general terms, as there are interactive solutions with a single graphical question triggers a sinfn operations, while a complex “interactive machines” can solve specific issues only scores. Matt Kelm Design / Human Interactivity We can make a first classification by very basic concepts: – Interactivity by computers or electronic characters: the interpelacin with visitors to the museum is scheduled informticamente using machines. – Interactivity mechanical or manipulative characters: it is a simple interaction using mecnicas solutions, ranging from the use of springs or electrical connectors. – Interactivity of human characters: use this denomination to refer to that interaction caused by human agents either entertainers, actors, guides, etc… We will do extensive clasificacinms encompassing, one way or another, these three above, but giving them more importance to involve machines, which is what really museographer complex. Let all: 1 Interaction with information. Using simple tactile screens, joysticks, keyboards with simple programs. Modules are actually located in the halls and they often report the contents of museums (maps, works, services, etc..). They are individual use, such as vending machines in subway tickets or very similar. 2. Interaction for learning simple: respond to interactive systems uncommon, even rare, uncommon. Are machines who act with a system of unidirectional response question: the question machine, the visitor responds. It looks like the token system learning. They get outdated very quickly. 3 Interatividad based video games. Were the most complex and expensive, complicated in its maintenance, so there are usually seen frequently in museums. They are the most effective, that s because they are really interactan machines with the visitor. The future of these systems for the mus 4. Interactivity based skills each: is very old and has been practiced as a game and as training. In the field of computer sciences there are many examples, the Tetris game is one of them. 5. Based puzzles Interactivity may not be informtica base. It’s a classic game taken to the computer, there is much more to explain, we’ve all played with them. 6. Interactivity based platforms: are video games where we spent from one phase to another depending on our skills. While we are not able to overcome a phase we can not move to the next and what we do if we prove knowledge of something concrete, for example. 7. Interactivity grficas adventures in them the protagonist ESTN are you and also based on our skills. It’s like a book, but instead of reading, plotting visualize it and completing the action of the plot as we want. You can use speech, examining objects, use objects, open doors … 8 Interactivity Role Playing Game. Estbasada in RPGs, so it will be part of history. Are visible from an overhead shot. Move the characters in a scenario in which points are Sealan to perform different actions. You control all the action. 9. Interactivity strategy: from checkers or chess, for individual work shifts – a move / decision after another – also called real-time strategy with cause and effect. Its aim is to demonstrate different skills to direct operations that will lead to a logical goal. In any case, from the merely human point of view, the word is one of the best interactive tools that we have men and women to access knowledge. Thanks to the word, we can interact with us directly into a friendly environment. It is an interactivity that is based on the oral and written word. If these lines leis, estis interacting with us in some way, reacting to what we have written. Pulsaris a button to “like” or not haris, I “inscribiris to blog” or cerraris the page, it recomendaris someone. These words may trigger a large number of actions based on the word – even in a digital environment -. Many of the approaches that museums need to respond to a need for active dissemination of knowledge can be solved with the use of the word, not so much written – the huge panels filled with authentic texts are a pain – but if we can hear what is being said, what is narrated, so other people can show us and we do not know yet. There’s guides, informants, animators, actors, all professionals fantsticos can we step into a story. At the end of the road, there is nothing that can really replace person-to-person interaction, as in Love matters. SANTACANA I MESTRE, J. / MARTÍN PIÑOL. C. Manual de museografía interactiva Editorial TREA, Gijón (2010)

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://evmuseography.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mueums-9-ways-to-interact/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:b781a170-bba0-4b5d-abfc-f567c59b7a6b>_50

C. Manual de museografía interactiva Editorial TREA, Gijón (2010)

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_0

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_1

They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_2

Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_3

As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_4

And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_6

According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_7

In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_8

Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_9

Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_10

In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_11

They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_12

The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_13

Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands.

You probably already know male black widow spiders are risking their lives when they go courting -- but it's actually worse than that. They face tough competition for the "honour" of mating. Once a virgin black widow female puts up a pheromone-laden mating web, males run in from all around to try their luck. As a result, the first male to arrive at the web can expect three to six rivals to show up before the long, slow, careful mating process is over. And the more males that arrive to mate with the female, the fewer of her eggs are likely to become his babies. What's a spider to do? According to Catherine Scott and her colleagues at Simon Fraser University, a little creative redecorating is in order. In many species of spider, males often remove large chunks of female webs before they mate. Black widow males are no different: the first male to arrive at a virgin's web typically rips out half of her silk strands and wraps them in his own silk. Scott found that this behaviour keeps other males from finding the female's web. In an experiment published at Animal Behaviour this week, Scott and her team compared how many wild males were attracted to black widow webs that were either untouched, cut up with scissors, or given a male's cut-and-wrap treatment. They found that although their cut up webs had had the same amount of silk removed as the male-altered ones, they attracted just as many males as the intact webs. The webs that had been altered by males, however, attracted three-fold fewer males. Scott thinks that a male may manage this thick by selecting the most pheromone-rich sections of web to destroy and hide away, or by applying his own counter-pheromones to the strands. However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself. Picture: Sean McCann

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/male-black-widows-go-to-crazy-lengths-to-keep-a-female-to-themselves/

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257645943.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20180318184945-20180318204945-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:869323f7-5c94-4344-8af8-1280443e0087>_14

However he does it, it seems to be an effective way to keep a female to himself.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_1

What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field?

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_2

Publish papers.Where should you publish?

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_4

How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals?

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_5

Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_6

We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_7

Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai).

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_8

With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_9

Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015).

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_10

This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_11

Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_12

In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_13

Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_14

Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_15

Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_16

We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”.

How do we talk about science? What is one of the most common ways to gain recognition in the scientific field? Publish papers.Where should you publish? In journals with a high impact factors. How do you get accepted into one of these renowned journals? Discover something flashy and communicate the significance to your audience. We are all aware of this mantra; however, successfully achieving this feat is much easier said than done. Between 2000 and 2012 alone, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) identified that the number of medical and scientific manuscripts published yearly skyrocketed from approximately 550,000 to 1,100,000 (Ridker & Rifai). With this growing competition for publishing papers, we as authors must step back and better evaluate our means of conveying information. Thankfully for us, the British Medical Journal recently published a retrospective analysis of word usage trends in Pubmed abstracts published between 1974 and 2014 (Vinkers et al, 2015). This evaluation is not only a fascinating insight into scientific writing style changes over the years, but it also allows us to criticize our own writing with greater scrutiny. Overall the rate of positive word usage, such as: increased 880% over the forty year study. In fact, one extrapolation suggests that the word “novel” will be featured in every published manuscript by 2123. Interestingly, when the pool of journal abstracts was reduced to those published in 20 of the highest impact journals, significantly fewer positive words were used, as compared to those used in all Pubmed journals. Similar but less drastic results were found for negative word usage in all Pubmed abstracts. Although breakthroughs in scientific technology are allowing us to understand the micro- and macroscopic world with finer detail, this drastic shift in positive and negative word usage should not go unrecognized. We must not oversell our accomplishments and findings for the sake off a “good paper”. As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean? By Katie Wozniak

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.carlsonscience.com/lab-blog/sciencetalk

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257646952.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20180319140246-20180319160246-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:2855a269-52ca-454a-90e3-789b4e971f55>_17

As stated in the article, “Overestimation of research findings directly impairs the ability of science to find true effects and leads to an unnecessary focus on research marketability.” The question that remains, which puzzles us all is: What does your data truly mean?

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_0

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful.

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_3

But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people.

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_4

In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them.

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_5

This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation.

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_6

"Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo.

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_7

Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water.

For a moment, the water in this Brazilian river looks peaceful. Then someone drops in a hunk of meat. Teddy Roosevelt wrote about the piranha in 1914, calling it the "most ferocious fish in the world": "If cattle are driven into, or of their own accord enter, the water, they are commonly not molested; but if by chance some unusually big or ferocious specimen of these fearsome fishes does bite an animal—taking off part of an ear, or perhaps of a teat from the udder of a cow—the blood brings up every member of the ravenous throng which is anywhere near, and unless the attacked animal can immediately make its escape from the water it is devoured alive." But really, according to National Geographic, piranhas rarely attack people. In this case, they probably hang out in this area because someone nearby feeds them. This makes them gather in numbers they normally wouldn't, which can create a dangerous situation. "Piranhas can be dangerous if they are trapped in a backwater without food, or [are] somehow concentrated in an area and they are hungry," National Geographic fellow Zeb Hogan told Nat Geo. Still, this seems like a great place not to fall out of one of those boats into the water. Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior. You can hear the water churning.

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://www.businessinsider.com/piranha-feeding-frenzy-video-2015-3

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:59017e64-baff-4914-99ef-01f563c3393d>_8

Check out the full video, uploaded to YouTube by Joao Antonio Cruz Junior.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_0

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_1

The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_2

From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_3

Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_4

Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_5

Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now?

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_6

He became an embarrassment and slowly died.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_7

A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him.

Short and intensely moving story of a Jewish child's experiences in World War 2 Poland. The first chapter describes a pleasant middle-class upbringing but ends 'less than one year later came September 1939 and it was all over'. From then on, the family is split up with the narrator travelling through Poland with his resourceful aunt, using false identity papers. Suspicious of everyone, careful of their every move, they pass themselves off as Catholic Poles and come close to losing their lives on a number of occasions. Yet even in the last chapter when the war is over, the lies must be kept up. Pogroms continue in liberated Poland and as Begley concludes: 'And where is Maciek now? He became an embarrassment and slowly died. A man who bears one of the names Maciek used has replaced him. Is there much of Maciek in that man? No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.' 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R1FP8299INRH3F

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647576.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321043531-20180321063531-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:5020bcfb-9aa4-4222-af8d-1689c9fecb7f>_9

No: Maciek was a child and our man has no childhood that he can bear to remember; he has had to invent one.'

About the book Evergreen animal fables, now inthis classic keepsake editionComposed in Sanskrit in around300 CE, the Panchatantra is oneof the oldest collections of fablesin the world. Devised for thepurposes of teaching three dull-witted sons of a king, it strives toconvey the principles of kingshipand some valuable life lessons.Relive the joy of this enduringclassic through this magnificenttranslation from the originalthat illuminates the wise, pithyand unexpectedly witty tales likenever before. About the Author Vishnu Sharma was a learnedBrahmin scholar and a renownedteacher who composed thePanchatantra at the age ofeighty. |Title:||It Has Been Said and Rightly So||Publisher:||Puffin|

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.infibeam.com/Books/has-been-said-rightly-so-vishnu-sharma/9780143334330.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647707.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321234947-20180322014947-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>_0

About the book Evergreen animal fables, now inthis classic keepsake editionComposed in Sanskrit in around300 CE, the Panchatantra is oneof the oldest collections of fablesin the world.

About the book Evergreen animal fables, now inthis classic keepsake editionComposed in Sanskrit in around300 CE, the Panchatantra is oneof the oldest collections of fablesin the world. Devised for thepurposes of teaching three dull-witted sons of a king, it strives toconvey the principles of kingshipand some valuable life lessons.Relive the joy of this enduringclassic through this magnificenttranslation from the originalthat illuminates the wise, pithyand unexpectedly witty tales likenever before. About the Author Vishnu Sharma was a learnedBrahmin scholar and a renownedteacher who composed thePanchatantra at the age ofeighty. |Title:||It Has Been Said and Rightly So||Publisher:||Puffin|

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.infibeam.com/Books/has-been-said-rightly-so-vishnu-sharma/9780143334330.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647707.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321234947-20180322014947-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>_1

Devised for thepurposes of teaching three dull-witted sons of a king, it strives toconvey the principles of kingshipand some valuable life lessons.Relive the joy of this enduringclassic through this magnificenttranslation from the originalthat illuminates the wise, pithyand unexpectedly witty tales likenever before.

About the book Evergreen animal fables, now inthis classic keepsake editionComposed in Sanskrit in around300 CE, the Panchatantra is oneof the oldest collections of fablesin the world. Devised for thepurposes of teaching three dull-witted sons of a king, it strives toconvey the principles of kingshipand some valuable life lessons.Relive the joy of this enduringclassic through this magnificenttranslation from the originalthat illuminates the wise, pithyand unexpectedly witty tales likenever before. About the Author Vishnu Sharma was a learnedBrahmin scholar and a renownedteacher who composed thePanchatantra at the age ofeighty. |Title:||It Has Been Said and Rightly So||Publisher:||Puffin|

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.infibeam.com/Books/has-been-said-rightly-so-vishnu-sharma/9780143334330.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647707.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321234947-20180322014947-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>_2

About the Author Vishnu Sharma was a learnedBrahmin scholar and a renownedteacher who composed thePanchatantra at the age ofeighty.

About the book Evergreen animal fables, now inthis classic keepsake editionComposed in Sanskrit in around300 CE, the Panchatantra is oneof the oldest collections of fablesin the world. Devised for thepurposes of teaching three dull-witted sons of a king, it strives toconvey the principles of kingshipand some valuable life lessons.Relive the joy of this enduringclassic through this magnificenttranslation from the originalthat illuminates the wise, pithyand unexpectedly witty tales likenever before. About the Author Vishnu Sharma was a learnedBrahmin scholar and a renownedteacher who composed thePanchatantra at the age ofeighty. |Title:||It Has Been Said and Rightly So||Publisher:||Puffin|

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.infibeam.com/Books/has-been-said-rightly-so-vishnu-sharma/9780143334330.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257647707.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20180321234947-20180322014947-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:97e3aa90-334e-4a5e-a803-3c588a7c808e>_3

|Title:||It Has Been Said and Rightly So||Publisher:||Puffin|

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_0

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_2

Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_3

The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_4

As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_5

Justified true belief creates knowledge.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_6

Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_7

Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_8

Why should we take action based on a statistic?

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_9

The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_11

Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_12

Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_13

A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_14

Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_17

Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_18

These people do not want to take our jobs.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_19

These are people seeking safety and asylum.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_21

The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_22

For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_23

This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_24

Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_25

Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_26

In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_27

Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_29

Climate change and global warming are statistics.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_30

Our brain does not understand statistics.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_31

We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_32

When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do?

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_33

History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_34

What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive?

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_35

In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_36

Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_37

Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_38

Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_39

In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_40

In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_41

Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy.

February 23, 2017 Climate change is real and happening now. The laws of physics are the truth. Our belief comes from our personal observations and scientific reporting. The justification is based on science, verified and validated evidence and experiments from the 1800s. As a result of these three - truth, belief and justification - we create the knowledge that climate change is real and happening now. Justified true belief creates knowledge. Actions by local, city, county and state government, will be to plan how to adapt to high probability of a 5.4 degrees F (3 degrees C) increase in global average temperature. Oh, wait, you can’t feel a global average temperature to know what that means. Why should we take action based on a statistic? The Arctic Sea will be ice free all summer. Mexico will be a dust bowl. Half of Florida will be covered by salt water every day, all day. Wildfires will continue to reduce the forested land west of the Rocky Mountains. A warmer atmosphere means the air will hold more water during storms, increasing flooding. Unsustainable oceans means hundreds of millions of people will have food insecurity every day. These are consequences in the future? Why should we worry about that now? Oregon citizens are going to feel the consequences of climate change when refugees seek water, food and shelter after arriving from California, Central America, Mexico and Asia. These people do not want to take our jobs. These are people seeking safety and asylum. They are simply trying to survive. The second action will be to plan for mitigating risks specific to each region of Oregon. For example, western Oregon will experience more rain, less snow, warmer winters and drier summers. This will mean more invasive insects damaging crops, diseases spread by mosquitoes, and refugees. Eastern and Southern Oregon will experience drought. Oregon will experience wildfires, drought, floods and unsustainable ocean fishing. In one state, Oregon has all of the different types of land, sea and air that are found in other places. Oregon will be a small example of all the different consequences of climate change. Humans everywhere experience weather. Climate change and global warming are statistics. Our brain does not understand statistics. We do not feel motived to prepare for low probability events. When the average global temperature increases by a fraction of a degree over 10 years, what am I suppose to do? History of Science of Global Warming In the early 1800s, Joseph Fourier asked “What determines the temperature of the surface of Earth?” In the 1820s, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. What was keeping the surface of the Earth warm enough for humans to survive? In 1859 John Tyndall, a professor of natural philosophy at London’s Royal Institution and a keen mountaineer, decided to test whether gases in the atmosphere could trap heat. Unlike water vapor that cycles in and out of the atmosphere relatively quickly, by contrast carbon dioxide is not influenced by weather and persists in the atmosphere for centuries. Increasing or decreasing CO2 changes Earth’s temperature, that effects the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, thus effecting the temperature. Svante Arrhenius (19 February 1859 – 2 October 1927), one of Sweden’s preeminent chemists, thought that what humans were doing on an increasingly large scale just might make his native land a little warmer. In the mid-1890s, he set about completing the arduous calculations to prove his point. In the 21st Century, Arrenhius’s idea that humans could make Sweden warmer seems like a prophecy. Today’s climate-change skeptics would have us believe that the whole notion of global warming is a relatively recent, half-baked idea dreamed up by a cabal of liberal scientists bent on destroying the U.S. economy. However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

http://turnock.blogspot.com/2017/02/statement-about-climate-change.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257650188.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20180324093251-20180324113251-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:bc38c4bc-777d-4d39-a568-c29accf33657>_42

However, the roots of scientific thinking about Earth’s temperature are clear from reading the history of science in the late 1800s.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_0

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_1

The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_2

Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_3

This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_4

Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_5

To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_6

I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin.

The places where predominately ethnic Tai people live -- southern China, eastern Myanmar and northern Thailand -- are also some of the earliest known areas of rice cultivation. The Tai may not have been the first people to grow and consume rice, but it's safe to say that they've been doing it for a while now. Yet aside from simply boiling or steaming the grains and eating them with other food, they have also come up with a variety of creative ways of preparing rice. This became clear to me in Kengtung, in Myanmar's Shan State, a place were many of the dishes continue to be very Tai, and largely untouched by the influences of Chinese, Muslim or western cooking styles, providing a unique insight into an ancient diet. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this is rice noodles, known in Tai/Shan as khao soi. To make these, a batter is made from rice flour and water, which is steamed then sliced into long strands. I'd assumed that the word khao soi had its origins in the Burmese hkauk hswe, which also means noodles and is pronounced very similarly, but my Shan guide insisted that the term is actually Tai in origin. It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them. A fascinating variation on rice strands is khao soi song chan ('two layers of khao soi'), a seasoned and filled noodle -- as far as I can recall, the only seasoned noodle I've encountered in Asia. The dish is made by combining a batter of rice flour and several seasonings -- soy sauce, MSG, sugar, chili oil, peanuts, garlic oil, chili in vinegar and chili in oil -- which are steamed in a thin pan floating in simmering water (shown at the top of this post). When firm, the steamed rice sheet is topped with vegetables and herbs including shredded cabbage, morning glory, lettuce, green beans and green onion, folded in half, and served with a drizzle of garlic oil: You can even throw an egg in, if you want. Either way, it's spicy savoury, nutty and garlicky, and requires no additional seasoning. A variation on the dish is khao soi khaep, in which the unseasoned noodles are stuffed with a minced chicken mixture (not unlike bánh cuốn), sliced, then topped with the same vegetables and seasonings as the previous dish: resulting in a something of a noodle-based salad. Blurring the line between cooked rice grains and noodles is khao pheun, thick hand-cut noodles made from a type of rice cake. In Mae Hong Son, a similar dish -- there typically made from chickpea flour -- is known as khao raem feun (ข้าวแรมฟืน), 'rice resting by the fire', so called because of the final stage of the cooking process. To make the dish, uncooked rice is soaked in water for a couple hours. After it's been ground to a paste, a bit of water is added and the mixture is simmered until thick. A coagulant -- usually lime -- is added, and the mixture is allowed to sit until it's cooled and has become a solid, somewhat jelly-like mass: To order, chunks are cut off by hand and mixed with a sweet/sour dressing, pickled mustard greens, shredded cabbage, and seasoned with chili and soy sauce:

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>

CC-MAIN-2018-13

https://www.austinbushphotography.com/blog/blog/masters-of-rice.html

s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2018-13/segments/1521257651820.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20180325044627-20180325064627-00110.warc.gz

en

<urn:uuid:29871a80-0435-43da-9581-c2360eeea0bb>_7

It would require some linguistic research to verify this, but given that khao soi can be translated as cut (soi) rice (khao), not to mention the Tai people's long-standing history of rice cultivation in the area, I wouldn't be surprised if the term could be linked to them.