There are lots of controversial issues on campus, in Lubbock, in Texas, and in the USA that would allow us to practice our critical thinking skills. However, sometimes I think it is easier to think critically about issues that don't seem to immediately affect us. Thus, I would like us to explore an issue that has been in the news recently that is happening in Malaysia.
Malaysia is a very interesting county. If you would like to know more about Malaysia, their environment, and the people that live there you can check out this powerpoint presentation. This slideshow, which is think is pretty cool, was developed by one of my Natural History and Humanities classes to be used in a 5th grade classroom. Even though it was intended for kids, it still serves as a useful introduction to Malaysia.
http://www.slideshare.net/secret/3JwD4G3hq4RjhQ
Crticial Thinking Exercise
Here is a link to the slideshow that I used in class.
http://www.slideshare.net/secret/9SnjQ9zV1GFQMX
Further Viewing
Malaysian woman to be caned for drinking beer - 23 Aug 09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnOWgCz5fj4
Further Reading
If you want to learn more about this story then here are links to a couple of CNN and BBC articles. It seems to me that the outcome of this story is still uncertain, so it will be interesting to follow it to see what happens.
Malaysian model, mother to be caned for drinking beer in public
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/08/20/malaysia.caning/index.html?iref=newssearch
Malaysia postpones woman's caning
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/08/24/malaysia.model.caning/index.html?iref=newssearch
Malaysia delays caning beer woman
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8217440.stm
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-14/world/eco.aquaculture.food_1_aquaculture-wild-fish-young-fish?_s=PM:WORLD
ReplyDeleteIn this article published by CNN, facts and interviews are used to establish credibility. The article focuses on the aquatic fisheries effects on the environment through its leading contributor--Asia. They interview a conservation activist and back up their quotes with evidence. They create a solid position and validity throughout the article. Which makes it hard to not accept their stance as as anything but correct.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6043/688.citation
ReplyDeleteClimate Change Sparks Battles in Classroom:
I found this article in a recent copy of Science Magazine. This fact, in and of itself, brings at least some credibility to the article as it comes from a source dedicated to science. The author, Sara Reardon, has a masters degree in physiology from Southern Illinois University and a second masters degree in biology from the University of Washington (this information was all provided by sciencmag.org) which brings even more validity to this source as she is obviously equipped with a scientific mind. This article was about the controversy that is resulting as schools try to implement climate change into the curriculum. While the author did not give her opinion on the subject directly she did quote many sources that took the side of those in favor of allowing climate change to be taught so there could be some underlying bias. Overall I would consider this source reasonably valid.
Mars Rover Discovery Elates NASA: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/science/space/02mars.html?_r=1&hp
ReplyDeleteThis article is form the New York Times and covers the new discovery of minerals in rocks on Mars containing large amounts of minerals such as zinc that suggest that they were formed with the help of water. This article uses facts taken from observations released by NASA and testimonial evidence from the head investigator of the rover mission Dr. Steven Squyres. These sources can be considered valid if one can first accept the premise that the NASA scientists understand what they observe and can create logical conclusions based on these observations. Considering that the man interviewed for this article has earned his doctorate degree and was specially chosen as the head investigator for this mission makes this a fairly reasonable assumption. Based on this assumption, it is safe to say that this article is valid.
http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_ARTICLEMAIN&node_id=222&content_id=CNBP_028108&use_sec=true&sec_url_var=region1&__uuid=6a1eccc6-935e-40b4-b88b-79b1d4ab64c2
ReplyDeleteThe American Chemical Society is revered for its dedication to research and development in chemistry. The ACS is the largest chemical society known to man and publishes countless articles each month concerning issues from economic crises to technological advancements in the field of chemical applications. The ACS is host to incalculable sums of databases of knowledge. So, when it publicly supports a claim related to environmental concern, note should be taken of the implications of the proposals which ACS is presenting.
The Fox News Network claims that it uses a “fair and balanced” approach to reporting the news; however, one cannot ignore the close ties Fox has to the GOP. Thus, the validity of this article as an objective report on an environmental issue is uncertain. Much controversy surrounded Fox News during the Bush Administration; the allegations included pushing a Republican Agenda during election and economic reporting, as well as the Iraqi invasion. Naturally Fox completely denied any republican bias and now alleges that Obama has an unfair bias towards other News Agencies. Furthermore, during the creation Obama’s healthcare package several emails were leaked, which seemed to encourage slanting of the coverage. In this instance, the article appears to be unbiased in that it does not specifically address the benefits or detriments of oil drilling in the Florida Everglades. Rather, it focuses on Michelle Bachmann (a republican presidential candidate) and her view of the matter. The article is primarily composed of Bachmann’s extensive quotes, which explicitly express her opinions on the subject of Everglade oil drilling. There is definitely some amount of political bias in any media network. Whether it is Fox News or CNN.
ReplyDeleteLink: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/28/bachmann-says-shed-consider-everglades-drilling/
http://www.willyoujoinus.com/energy.issues/energychallengesandopportunities/energyandtheenvironment/introductiontoenergyandtheenvironment/?gclid=CJnl5LKYhasCFUheTAodMH6j1Q
ReplyDeleteStraight from the PR department at Chevron, this article is a well written description of the environmental impact caused by the Chevron Corporation. Obvious to the informed reader will be the understatements adjoined with any oil companies defense of itself. The situation summarized by Chevron is presented in a manner that leads the reader to favor them. It's a proven fact that we do consider fuel a "necessity" so is Chevron really to be considered the "bad guy" for trying to present their goal in a brighter light? No, they are not. Everything is presented properly, honestly, and the information is even cited at the end of the article. Chevron's site is trying to build a reputation as a trusted source on the industry. And if they continue in this direction, Chevron will skyrocket in their industry.
link: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Politics-Overtaking-Science-in-Global-Warming-Debate-128803748.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about two scientists Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, and how they have and are bringing light to the way that politicians and corporations address issues. The nature of the article its self allows me to know that it is of a credible source. There is also the fact that the two scientists are noted for their previous work on 'Merchants of Doubt'. They pull from politicians’ speeches such as Rick Perry, and show the false accusations and political biases of them. After weighting the facts i believe this article is valid and of a credible source.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/05/business/economy/a-debate-arises-on-job-creation-vs-environmental-regulation.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is from The New york Times, a reliable and credible source of information and news. It describes the Republican views on whether it is more important to preserve the environment and tighten regulations on issues, or preserve American jobs and loosen the restrictions. It is supported by economists who say regulation greatly affects workers and costs to run businesses. Also, the other side is supported by many other economists and activists who recognize that many regulations have resulted in much less job loss and profit cuts than originally anticipated. A major problem that they realize and discuss is the fact that once restrictions and laws are put into action, they sit in the books and become completely unexamined. Many regulations could be null or unimportant if they checked them. This article is important and relevant to heed because it accurately explains both sides of the issue with supported facts and figures that are not misconstrued. The New York Times is a reliable source of news and information.
http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?201553/Poaching-contributes-to-forest-elephant-declines-in-Cte-dIvoire-new-numbers-reveal
ReplyDeleteThe article I choose was found on the World Wildlife Fund's (WWF) website. As the article is found on the WWF's website, I am highly inclined to view it as being from a reliable source. I make this assertion, because the WWF is known for its use of scientific data (Encyclopedia Britannica). Additionally, the WWF is, by definition, concerned about conserving the environment which means that conduct and publish research pertaining to the state of the environment. Overall, the WWF is a reputable source, which does lend credence to the articles they put forth.
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kera/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1847618/US/Drought.intensifies.in.the.South..no.end.in.sight
ReplyDeleteMy article about the intense drought in the South is from an NPR website. First of all, since it is from the internet, millions of users have the access to edit the article with their own information. Luckily, NPR has certain restrictions in place to allow only registered and recognized employees are able to contribute to the website and post articles. Also, adding the the reliability is the use of actual experts trained in the subject, such as climatologists. All facts, data, and percentages are cited to come from the US Drought Monitor, and can actually be checked for accuracy, Lastly, the reporter use precise diction and straight-forward descriptions to get easily understood information to the public. All factors combined, the source gives facts and information in a reliable way.
http://discovermagazine.com/2011/jun/01-fixers
ReplyDeleteAbove is an article I found on Discover
Magazine’s website. Originally the article seems a bit more substantial because it is on not only the web but also in a published magazine. In the very first sentence it lists some of its sources of by saying, “Discover teamed up with NBC, Citizen Science, Yale University, and the National Science Foundation.” Throughout the article they seem to make it clear that their opinion is not the only one. They state the different sides of the argument about global warming more than they provide falsified facts. In the article they list names and professions of people they interviewed, results of polls, and actual interviews. Overall, the article seems pretty trustworthy and well developed.
http://eatocracy.cnn.com/2011/09/04/shark-fin-soup-faces-extinction-in-california/?iref=allsearch
ReplyDeleteThis article is from CNN and focuses on the potential passing of a bill that would make it illegal to sell shark fins in California. Eating shark fins are a major staple in Chinese culture, but some are questioning whether or not it is worth contributing to the tens of millions of sharks killed each year, threatening the balance of the ocean's ecosystem. The article uses information from the Shark Alliance, a global, non-profit and non-government organization, whose goal is to protect sharks. The information from the Shark Alliance does not include any hard facts that can be checked. The Shark Alliance might not be a reliable source, due to the fact they only presented general statements that are biased to opposing the sale of shark fins. The article also has statements from Assemblymembers opposing the bill, who only used persuasive language instead of scientific fact. There is no hard evidence proving why or why not the bill should be passed for cultural or environmental reasons, only personal beliefs, therefor I believe the validity of this article is not certain and is not necessarily a reliable source.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/GlobalWarming-ClimateChange-Gallup-/2011/04/29/id/394519
ReplyDeleteThe problem with this article is that it tries to use the American peoples’ opinion as evidence against global warming. And, while it is obvious that the American peoples’ opinion is the most important, it still isn’t quite enough to form an actual fact. Unfortunately, even if every American doesn’t believe climate change is a threat, that doesn’t change the actual science of it, even though it should. It also seems to be trying to make the case that only poor nations are concerned about these issues.