sdgih

Article 1
 Genetically Modified (GM) Foods.

• Consumption of GM foods
• Consumer image of GM food depends on its sale
• Consumer adversion to labeled GM food
• GM food sells better when the market is saturated
• Consumers perceive GM foods as different than

Article 2
  Light and photosynthesis in aquatic ecosystems

• Plants need Solar energy, CO2, minerals, water
• Water absorbs and scatters light
• Light absorption varies with depth
• Aquatic plants are less effective than land plants
• Hydrologic Optics
• Light is measured in "quantas"
• The average cosine for downwelling is equal to the downward irradiance divided by the downward scalar irradiance.

My thoughts on the thing we saw

Nate Lewis is an amazing man. Simple as that.

At first I thought this would be just another alarmist weirdo talking about how "Were all gonna die, and theres nothing we can do." I was wrong. I do not feel that we as class understood the sheer magnitude of what he was saying when he said the word Terawatt. A terawatt is a ridiculously huge amount of energy, enough energy to power 10 billion 100 watt light bulbs. I am just purely amazed by the amount of power needed to fuel humanity. I found it compelling the way he introduced the facts and odd that there are so many alternative power sources that just simply can not provide the 13 TW we need to survive. The only feasible power source is in fact solar power.

The sun provides, as Nate Lewis said, about 600 TW of reasonable accessible energy. to put that HUGE number into scale. 600 TW is 6.0 × 10^14 watts, if you had a rope that was 6.0 × 10^14 MILLIMETERS (0.0393700787 inch) It would wrap around the world 1498 times! That is HUGE and that also means that the amount of power we can get from the Sun. but for me the question is, how do we turn that power into something that wont strain our infrastructure. I beleive he was right by saying that chemical energy is the way to go but that is much easier said than done.

Holy 3 annotated sources on climate change Batman!!

Source 1:GWsource_1
Historical CO2 Record from the Vostok Ice Core 

• Shows co2 data from the past 400000 years
• Shows an upward trend in recent years
• one of the main components in the graphs used by al gore
• this data comes from antarctic ice cores going down 3304m
• takes into account age of ice and air from samples

Source 2:GWsource_2
Historical Isotopic Temperature Record from the Vostok Ice Core  

• uses the Vostok ice data to calculate temperature data
• temp data goes back over 400000 years
• has no temperature variation in the last 120 years
• a brief look over seems to show a large amount of negative numbers
• this data is used as the standard for graphics on climate change

Source 3:GWsource_3
Estimating the uncertainty of the Mann et al. (1998, 1999) reconstructions 

• bring into question the accuracy of the Mann et al study
• Defines the complicated terms that relate to error in a way that most people can understand
• shows a similar but different trend than the one seen in AIT 
• Admits to possible error in his data and asks for reviews to clarify
• brings into question weather the smoothing models used on the graphs change the outcome
• bring up possible errors and solutions with graphs and data readings.

I believe that by using the same sources that were used by the scientists, i will be able to create a balanced  set of data that are not influenced by media. In my senior project I will be able to use this data to make predictions about the future and the effect that climate change will have on human life.

I also included a media article because it shows a good way for me to find my own data. I admire the way the the author of the JunkScience website used data to come to his own conclusion without the influence of data or "facts" that mainstream media gives. This makes his finding a little more reputable.