I was wondering how long it would take for Kolbert to mention humans harmful actions when it comes to global warming. When presenting the information, her style of writing has changed. Kolbert goes beyond making a statement. She supports her facts with credible sources and in-depth explanation of scientific terms. She speaks of the history behind the influence of humans in the global warming situation.
Kolbert's sources inform us about our actions and the consequences of it. Besides blaming us, Kolbert discusses the possible ways to help the environment and plans to keep carbon emissions down. Using new technology, upgrading others and finding alternative fuel sources to generate power without producing carbon. I feel she should have presented this information first and maybe the book would've started off with a kick rather than a walk in the park (boring).
Finally! She wrote what we can do to help receive such changes on earth. We (the people) need to first realize that we are damaging our environment and are willing to change it. Political action needs to be taken, though the Kyoto Protocol is already making an effort to control greenhouse emissions. When presenting the political part of the issue, Kolbert no longer is descriptive in her words or even humorous. She writes with complete seriousness and concern, which definitely fits in with the topic. I really enjoyed these two chapters because I felt like I actually learned something, simply because Kolbert was straightforward and assertive. Her opinion lessened and her statements
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
Field Notes: Chapters 5-6
According to GISS, more and more droughts are being triggered, which we are not able to adapt to with our way of living. This problem in ancient civilizations, such as with the Mayans and in the city of Shekhna, when they reached their technological peak. In the beginning of chapter 5, Kolbert talks of the city and the Mayans, but I'm not pleased with the way she went about presenting the subject. She started off long and her point seemed to be off topic. I felt I was reading a history book.
Kolbert's style of writing is very narrative and sentimental in chapter 5. When describing everything from the ancient civilizations that have experienced climate change to her visit GISS, an outpost of the NASA. She uses scientific evidence based on geological models that chart the geographic downfall of other ancient civilizations, which better supports her her angle, which gets a bit confusing. The evidence wasn't being processed and I would have to repeatedly read again to try and understand the evidence she is presenting. During ancient times, however, the technology had yet to be developed and they did not have the proper scientific abilities to adapt to extreme changes like a massive drought. Kolbert argues that we may be technologically advanced, but as we continue to progress, we are becoming more and more destructive to the environment as well.
In chapter six, Kolbert visits the Netherlands where the Dutch have made many provisions to prevent the increasing problem of widespread flooding. In this chapter, she was more consistent and straight-forward. Unlike the previous chapter, Kolbert explained everything easily and all her information wasn't as puzzling. Her writing style contributes to that success. She smoothly presented the evidence and made it an easy-read.
I learned the two main problems for the widespread flooding are caused by warming water that leads to expansion and raises the sea level, another is due to precipitation changes produced by a warming Earth. Eelke Turkstra, water-ministry official, believes that instead of building more dikes, the existing dikes should be dismantled to make room for the rising water. He wants to buy polders, land that has been laboriously reclaimed from the water, from farmers and lower surrounding dikes around them to create more area for the rising water. Then, Kolbert talks to Chris Zevenbergen, Dura Vermeer's environmental director, who creates amphibious homes which will float on the water if a flood were to occur. She ends the chapter being very descriptive about the how the floating houses looked, once again she played my eyes and ears. She closed with a great quote from a woman who lives in those houses. Despite her history lessons and somewhat difficult science jargon, Kolbert still manages to prove her superb science writing
Kolbert's style of writing is very narrative and sentimental in chapter 5. When describing everything from the ancient civilizations that have experienced climate change to her visit GISS, an outpost of the NASA. She uses scientific evidence based on geological models that chart the geographic downfall of other ancient civilizations, which better supports her her angle, which gets a bit confusing. The evidence wasn't being processed and I would have to repeatedly read again to try and understand the evidence she is presenting. During ancient times, however, the technology had yet to be developed and they did not have the proper scientific abilities to adapt to extreme changes like a massive drought. Kolbert argues that we may be technologically advanced, but as we continue to progress, we are becoming more and more destructive to the environment as well.
In chapter six, Kolbert visits the Netherlands where the Dutch have made many provisions to prevent the increasing problem of widespread flooding. In this chapter, she was more consistent and straight-forward. Unlike the previous chapter, Kolbert explained everything easily and all her information wasn't as puzzling. Her writing style contributes to that success. She smoothly presented the evidence and made it an easy-read.
I learned the two main problems for the widespread flooding are caused by warming water that leads to expansion and raises the sea level, another is due to precipitation changes produced by a warming Earth. Eelke Turkstra, water-ministry official, believes that instead of building more dikes, the existing dikes should be dismantled to make room for the rising water. He wants to buy polders, land that has been laboriously reclaimed from the water, from farmers and lower surrounding dikes around them to create more area for the rising water. Then, Kolbert talks to Chris Zevenbergen, Dura Vermeer's environmental director, who creates amphibious homes which will float on the water if a flood were to occur. She ends the chapter being very descriptive about the how the floating houses looked, once again she played my eyes and ears. She closed with a great quote from a woman who lives in those houses. Despite her history lessons and somewhat difficult science jargon, Kolbert still manages to prove her superb science writing
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Field Notes: Chapter 4
This chapter had me convinced that global warming is no myth. Kolbert clearly explains the consequences global warming has on the land and biological species. However, Kolbert's main focus was on the earth's butterflies and toads. When discussing the species she used their general name and in parenthesis she would state their scientific name. Kolbert thoroughly went through who the victims would be; what will happen to them; when it might take effect; and where this might take place.
The chapter was a questioning one -- what if. I can definitely say I was a bit frightened after reading it because I never knew this was happening. Kolbert chose to use these specific examples, so readers can feel the same way I do and hopefully, they might want to do something about it. She also used them to clearly project that if the world is constantly moving, the species living within it have no choice but to shift along with the earth. She subliminally states throughout the chapter that "history repeats itself" ; this happened before and it has a chance of happening again, according to recorded data.
The most striking moment was the extinction of the Golden toad. With exclusive details, Kolbert was able to accurately tell the tale of the species' short life on earth. I wish I was able to see such a beautiful creature. Overall, I felt the chapter itself was memorable. People aren't informed of such information, so this chapter served its purpose. Everything little thing served its purpose from the hardcore facts to the description of a biologist.
The chapter was a questioning one -- what if. I can definitely say I was a bit frightened after reading it because I never knew this was happening. Kolbert chose to use these specific examples, so readers can feel the same way I do and hopefully, they might want to do something about it. She also used them to clearly project that if the world is constantly moving, the species living within it have no choice but to shift along with the earth. She subliminally states throughout the chapter that "history repeats itself" ; this happened before and it has a chance of happening again, according to recorded data.
The most striking moment was the extinction of the Golden toad. With exclusive details, Kolbert was able to accurately tell the tale of the species' short life on earth. I wish I was able to see such a beautiful creature. Overall, I felt the chapter itself was memorable. People aren't informed of such information, so this chapter served its purpose. Everything little thing served its purpose from the hardcore facts to the description of a biologist.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Field Notes Chapters 2-3
Using many different examples, Kolbert supports the theory of global warming. She starts off using a scientist dated back to the 1800s to begin her timeline of other scientists who made remarkable discoveries about carbon dioxide and rising temperatures to help prove the point -- something needs to be done. Each person used to help emphasize the world's climate change had significant credentials in heir background proving to be credible in this case. The timeline starts with curiosity of one scientist and the rest just pick up where the other left off.
The argument, however, was strongly supported in most cases. There were four strongest pieces of evidence adduced in support of the theory of global warming. The greenhouse gases were accounted for the fact that "the average global temperature, instead of zero, is actually a far more comfortable fifty-seven degrees." If equilibrium of the quantity of radiation both receiving and giving are unbalanced, the planet would either have to heat up or cool down to get to normal temperature again. Kolbert supported her case with places in ice-lands that are beginning to melt or shift. Greenland's temperatures increases, sea level rises, and the Swiss Camp floating on ice thoroughly support her claim.
Kolbert even throws in information that contradicts the global warming theory. Talking about the miscalculations of CO2 in the atmosphere by one of the scientist, she uses that to stand on both sides; yet, at the same time she answers and questions and speculations readers may have against Kolbert's global warming theory. With recent studies and a more effective, modernized way to measure atmospheric CO2, the Keeling Curve, she wins the argument once again. What I admire the most of her writing style and skill is the way she turned a study into something readable -- scientific jargon to English.
The argument, however, was strongly supported in most cases. There were four strongest pieces of evidence adduced in support of the theory of global warming. The greenhouse gases were accounted for the fact that "the average global temperature, instead of zero, is actually a far more comfortable fifty-seven degrees." If equilibrium of the quantity of radiation both receiving and giving are unbalanced, the planet would either have to heat up or cool down to get to normal temperature again. Kolbert supported her case with places in ice-lands that are beginning to melt or shift. Greenland's temperatures increases, sea level rises, and the Swiss Camp floating on ice thoroughly support her claim.
Kolbert even throws in information that contradicts the global warming theory. Talking about the miscalculations of CO2 in the atmosphere by one of the scientist, she uses that to stand on both sides; yet, at the same time she answers and questions and speculations readers may have against Kolbert's global warming theory. With recent studies and a more effective, modernized way to measure atmospheric CO2, the Keeling Curve, she wins the argument once again. What I admire the most of her writing style and skill is the way she turned a study into something readable -- scientific jargon to English.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
"Field Notes From A Catastrophe"
This is well-written, simply because the simplicity of it.
It's a journalistic science book. Why? Because she was informing readers about something we already knew, but presented it to us differently and she explained scientific terms, for those who "skip over it." Elizabeth Kolbert uses great sources in the book, which contributes to the true journalistic writing. Each point and fact given was supported with recent, credible sources. She even compared statistics/numbers to objects and places to show rather than tell.
Kolbert began the book with a scene-setter/narrative and pretty much, the rest of the book is structured that way. She took a different approach for a book introductory, especially a science book about global warming. Honestly, most people don't care about global warming because they don't know what it actually is and does, thanks to scientific jargon. Constantly, personal experiences are used to help prove a scientific point. Kolbert mixes experience with facts to give readers a better understanding of how global warming is detriment to society today.
Being the ears and eyes of the expedition, Kolbert does a great job in being detailed, which further helped explain the global warming issue. She even uses mini-dialogue to bring the story to life.
It's a journalistic science book. Why? Because she was informing readers about something we already knew, but presented it to us differently and she explained scientific terms, for those who "skip over it." Elizabeth Kolbert uses great sources in the book, which contributes to the true journalistic writing. Each point and fact given was supported with recent, credible sources. She even compared statistics/numbers to objects and places to show rather than tell.
Kolbert began the book with a scene-setter/narrative and pretty much, the rest of the book is structured that way. She took a different approach for a book introductory, especially a science book about global warming. Honestly, most people don't care about global warming because they don't know what it actually is and does, thanks to scientific jargon. Constantly, personal experiences are used to help prove a scientific point. Kolbert mixes experience with facts to give readers a better understanding of how global warming is detriment to society today.
Being the ears and eyes of the expedition, Kolbert does a great job in being detailed, which further helped explain the global warming issue. She even uses mini-dialogue to bring the story to life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
