My topic is extracurricular activities and professionalization. First, I had to look up professionalization because I didn’t know what it meant. According to the Princeton online dictionary:
S: (n) professionalization, professionalisation (the social process whereby people come to engage in an activity for pay or as a means of livelihood)
An example of this would be American sports
Extracurricular activities are important for college students for many reasons. It helps students to build respectable resumes. Potential employers look at the involvement level on resumes, and generally view high levels as positive. These extracurricular activities are also important as students try to get into colleges. Students can find hope in this, for according to The College Board, “the good news is that colleges pay attention to your life both inside and outside the classroom. Yes, your academics probably come first, but your activities reveal a great deal about you, such as:
How you've made a meaningful contribution to something
What your non-academic interests are
Whether you can maintain a long-term commitment
Whether you can manage your time and priorities
What diversity you'd bring to the student body
According to collegematchus.com’s article, “ College Admission Trends,” Those, “Students hoping to gain an edge in an increasingly competitive admission picture can improve their chances by “professionalizing” their extra-curricular by using slide portfolios, CD’s/CD-ROM’s, to showcase their work to art departments and admission committees. By creating artist’s statements, portfolios or publishing their manuscripts in advance of applying to colleges, students can stand out more from the rest of the crowd.” I suppose they make their hobbies and activities seem more like an opportunity to get paid or earn a livelihood, which is more appealing to colleges and potential employers.
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=professionalization
http://www.collegematchus.com/top_trends.htm
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Therapeutic Touch
Energy has taken on a new identity in recent years. It has become something found in people, in nature, and in homes. It has also become something that is impossible to measure and unrelated to science in any way.
This is unfortunate because, as Robert Todd Carroll so perfectly puts it in his Skeptic Dictionary, “only healers with special powers at "unblocking," "harmonizing," "unifying," "tuning," aligning," "balancing," "channeling," or otherwise manipulating New Age energy, can measure this energy. How? They measure it by feeling it.” That leaves those of us who can’t “feel” this phenomenon at the mercy of those who claim that they can.
A curious 9-year old named Emily Rosa took this dilemma into her own hands. She tested 21 therapeutic touch (TT) practitioners to see if they could feel her life energy when they could not see its source. The test was very simple and seems to clearly indicate that the subjects could not detect the life energy of the little girl’s hands when placed near theirs. The Skeptic’s Dictionary stated that, “they had a 50% chance of being right in each test, yet they correctly located Emily's hand only 44% of the time in 280 trials.” If they can’t detect the energy, how can they manipulate or transfer it? What are they detecting? In another instance, Dr. Dolores Krieger, one of the creators of TT, was offered $1,000,000 by skeptic James Randi, to demonstrate that she, or anyone else for that matter, could detect the human energy field. So far, Dr. Krieger has not been tested.
http://skepdic.com/energy.html
Monday, November 26, 2007
interracial families
The most prominent issue I found in interracial families is children’s confusion. Children of interracial families face questions such as, “Who am I?” and “Where do I fit in?” Parents tell stories of facing difficult situations when their children pose these questions and how they struggle to answer when their children ask why they do not share the same race. Children are often encouraged to choose one race and “be loyal” to it. (this pressure is usually exerted by peers.) There are also many derogatory names for these children.
These negative aspects of interracial families are usually the ones focused on, especially in literature, however, in the article “What Are The Strengths of Interracial Families,” by Kelly N. Burrello the positive side of interracial families are highlighted. For example, they tend to preserve the richness of the customs and languages of both cultures and the children are taught about diversity. The families become models of appropriate behavior on how to treat those who are different, they promote tolerance as well as coexistence.
Interracial families are not only formed when two people of different races marry, some families choose to adopt children from other countries. In this case there is the obvious risk that the child may feel excluded. It never really occurred to me, but when researching it was brought up on the Cynthia Leitich Smith website that even innocent children’s books contribute to these feelings. These adopted children do not see themselves featured in the family settings of their bedtime stories, and this causes confusion.
It is a difficult situation but professionals provide guideline for parents. They are instructed to treat all children equally. This includes special treatment as well. Parents must also makes sure that grandparents and others involved in the child’s life are aware of the need to equality. It is also important to teach the children patience. It is inevitable that, growing up, they will be faced with questions, some with negative overtones. It is important to plan general responses and to teach the children not to get angry.
According to a Dartmouth study, “Recent census data confirm that one in 25 families is interracial (one in 10 in California) and trends show increasing acceptance of interracial marriage among the general public.” With these growing numbers it is important to be aware of the positives, negatives, and difficulties that these interracial families face.
Extra facts:
Results from Census 2000
Nearly 7 Million (2.4 percent) of Americans described themselves as multiracial in the 2000
Census.
Among Americans younger than 18, for example, 4.2 percent were multiracial, compared with
1.9 percent of adults.
Census officials claim that the number of interracial couples more than quadrupled between
1970 and 1995.
Among the 13 states where the Census Bureau has released detailed race information so far,
multiracial populations range from less than 1 percent in Mississippi to 4.5 percent in Oklahoma.
Among big counties in those states, Fairfax and Prince William counties in Virginia were among the top
10 with their multiracial populations, about 4 percent.
Additional Stats (Jet, Oct 6, 1997):
Thirty years ago, only one in every 100 children born in the United States was of mixed race.
http://www.diversitydtg.com/articles/interracial_families.htm
http://www.cynthialeitichsmith.com/lit_resources/diversity/multiracial/multi_race_picbooks.html
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/releases/2001/sept01/marryingout.html
These negative aspects of interracial families are usually the ones focused on, especially in literature, however, in the article “What Are The Strengths of Interracial Families,” by Kelly N. Burrello the positive side of interracial families are highlighted. For example, they tend to preserve the richness of the customs and languages of both cultures and the children are taught about diversity. The families become models of appropriate behavior on how to treat those who are different, they promote tolerance as well as coexistence.
Interracial families are not only formed when two people of different races marry, some families choose to adopt children from other countries. In this case there is the obvious risk that the child may feel excluded. It never really occurred to me, but when researching it was brought up on the Cynthia Leitich Smith website that even innocent children’s books contribute to these feelings. These adopted children do not see themselves featured in the family settings of their bedtime stories, and this causes confusion.
It is a difficult situation but professionals provide guideline for parents. They are instructed to treat all children equally. This includes special treatment as well. Parents must also makes sure that grandparents and others involved in the child’s life are aware of the need to equality. It is also important to teach the children patience. It is inevitable that, growing up, they will be faced with questions, some with negative overtones. It is important to plan general responses and to teach the children not to get angry.
According to a Dartmouth study, “Recent census data confirm that one in 25 families is interracial (one in 10 in California) and trends show increasing acceptance of interracial marriage among the general public.” With these growing numbers it is important to be aware of the positives, negatives, and difficulties that these interracial families face.
Extra facts:
Results from Census 2000
Nearly 7 Million (2.4 percent) of Americans described themselves as multiracial in the 2000
Census.
Among Americans younger than 18, for example, 4.2 percent were multiracial, compared with
1.9 percent of adults.
Census officials claim that the number of interracial couples more than quadrupled between
1970 and 1995.
Among the 13 states where the Census Bureau has released detailed race information so far,
multiracial populations range from less than 1 percent in Mississippi to 4.5 percent in Oklahoma.
Among big counties in those states, Fairfax and Prince William counties in Virginia were among the top
10 with their multiracial populations, about 4 percent.
Additional Stats (Jet, Oct 6, 1997):
Thirty years ago, only one in every 100 children born in the United States was of mixed race.
http://www.diversitydtg.com/articles/interracial_families.htm
http://www.cynthialeitichsmith.com/lit_resources/diversity/multiracial/multi_race_picbooks.html
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/releases/2001/sept01/marryingout.html
faith healers
Reverend Peter Popoff is seen nationwide on 51 television outlets and heard on 40 radio stations. His success is vast, however when a group of reasearchers from the Scientific Examination of Religion came to investigate, it was found that Popoff’s success was not deserved. As a “faith healer,” he claimed to have a direct connection with God. In his shows, he would identify people in the audience, using their names, addresses, and illnesses. However, instead of possessing the divine connection he claimed, the information was really given to him by his wife via a tiny earpiece he wore during the show. His wife sat in an area where the audience could not see her, but she could see her husband and direct him to individuals saying things like, “the lady in the blue, or way to your left, back row.” “When the Popoff ministry was asked whether Popoff used a secret receiver in his ear, Janice Gleason, a public relations consultant for the Popoff organization, said that the electronic receiver in Popoff's ear was used only to keep in touch with the television crew. (In the hours of taped transmissions, there was not one communication with the television crew.) Gleason said she believed that the woman's voice heard on the Tonight Show was faked. But Popoff later admitted that it was his wife who was communicating with him.” The site even features an “actual video of Popoff in the act of fraud”
http://www.bible.ca/tongues-popoff-39-17Mhz.htm
http://www.bible.ca/tongues-popoff-39-17Mhz.htm
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
torture
Torture is not a new issue in the United States. For years, torture has been debated, and questions about ethics, rights, and obligations have arisen. When researching, it became obvious that waterboarding is the most current torture issue in the US. All of the most recent articles about torture mention waterboarding. But when looking at the current questions it is important to look at the past as well. An important part of torture’s past in the United States is, the Geneva Conventions. To put is simply, the Geneva Conventions set international standards for treatment of prisoners of war. According to the International Conference of the Red Cross, or ICRC, the Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols are, “international treaties that contain the most important rules limiting the barbarity of war. They protect people who do not take part in the fighting (civilians, medics, aid workers) and those who can no longer fight (wounded, sick and shipwrecked troops, prisoners of war).” These treaties are important to know when forming opinions about current issues. For example, in 1996, what came to be known as The War Crimes of 1996 occurred, and made it a criminal offense for US military to commit war crimes. Well, this law is quite useless unless a war crime is defined. Thanks to the Geneva Conventions, it is defined as, “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture; …outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” Well, now we’re stuck with defining torture. A federal anti-torture stature enacted in 1994 does just that saying, “ Torture is defined as an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically inteded to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” In this article it is also stated that those who are found guilty under this act can face up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture resulted in the victim’s death.
To gain a further understanding of what specifically has been considered torture in the past I searched for timelines. One published by the Human Rights Watch, was extremely detailed in analyzing the opinions on tortures since 2002. Some of the most important highlighted by this timeline were, first, on Christmas day of December 2005, the Washington Post published the treatment of persons being held by the CIA in Bagram air base. (they were held in awkward, painful positions, forced to wear blacked out goggles, and deprived of sleep. The public was shocked, and the official who supervised the capture of the accused terrorists responded saying, “I don’t think we want to be promoting a view of zero tolerance on this.” Other quoted officials had similar opinions. One even said, “We don’t kick the (expletive) out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick the (expletive) out of them.” This sending of prisoners to other countries continued into 2003, and the timeline cited numerous examples of this, one where an al Qaeda detainee was sent from Guantanamo to Egypt where, “They promptly tore his fingernails out and he started to tell things.” This stuck out because in the radio segment we listened to Guantanamo was talked about a lot, and it surprised me that someone could be sent somewhere to receive worse treatment. A somewhat positive entry on the timeline stated that in January of 2004, the army ordered members who had abused prisoners to forfeit two months’ salary.
Torture has been going on in the United States since the first war, however now it is becoming more closely examined and much less tolerated. History shows that it is extremely difficult to make laws because there is so much confusion with definitions and boundaries. History also shows that torture tends to occur, despite the laws. It is sad, and sick what we are capable of doing to others.
To gain a further understanding of what specifically has been considered torture in the past I searched for timelines. One published by the Human Rights Watch, was extremely detailed in analyzing the opinions on tortures since 2002. Some of the most important highlighted by this timeline were, first, on Christmas day of December 2005, the Washington Post published the treatment of persons being held by the CIA in Bagram air base. (they were held in awkward, painful positions, forced to wear blacked out goggles, and deprived of sleep. The public was shocked, and the official who supervised the capture of the accused terrorists responded saying, “I don’t think we want to be promoting a view of zero tolerance on this.” Other quoted officials had similar opinions. One even said, “We don’t kick the (expletive) out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick the (expletive) out of them.” This sending of prisoners to other countries continued into 2003, and the timeline cited numerous examples of this, one where an al Qaeda detainee was sent from Guantanamo to Egypt where, “They promptly tore his fingernails out and he started to tell things.” This stuck out because in the radio segment we listened to Guantanamo was talked about a lot, and it surprised me that someone could be sent somewhere to receive worse treatment. A somewhat positive entry on the timeline stated that in January of 2004, the army ordered members who had abused prisoners to forfeit two months’ salary.
Torture has been going on in the United States since the first war, however now it is becoming more closely examined and much less tolerated. History shows that it is extremely difficult to make laws because there is so much confusion with definitions and boundaries. History also shows that torture tends to occur, despite the laws. It is sad, and sick what we are capable of doing to others.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
88 Reasons
Edgar Whisenant predicted that Jesus would return to rapture His church sometime between September 11th and September 13th 1988. The rocket engineer turned prophecy teacher’s claim found its way into the hands of 200,000 pastors nationwide. His claim was published in a booklet entitled, “88 Reasons Why the Rapture Could Be in 1988.” 3.2 million copes were made.
Despite the booklets amazing popularity, September of 1988 came and went without the world ending, or anything truly significant occuring. Whisenant’s prediction was wrong. Dean C. Halverson sheds some light on Whisenant’s mistakes in his article for the Christian Research Journal, “88 Reasons: What Went Wrong?” Halverson says, “in at least one instance Whisenant incorrectly interprets a biblical symbol, and then proceeds to build his predictions upon the shaky foundation of that faulty interpretation.” He uses the example of Whisenant’s seventh reason, in which he uses the symbol of a blooming fig tree incorrectly.
Whisenant received a lot of attention for his 88 reasons, and even went on to write another similar booklet entitled, “On Borrowed Time.” But despite all his reasons, the world is still turning and no rapture has occurred.
Despite the booklets amazing popularity, September of 1988 came and went without the world ending, or anything truly significant occuring. Whisenant’s prediction was wrong. Dean C. Halverson sheds some light on Whisenant’s mistakes in his article for the Christian Research Journal, “88 Reasons: What Went Wrong?” Halverson says, “in at least one instance Whisenant incorrectly interprets a biblical symbol, and then proceeds to build his predictions upon the shaky foundation of that faulty interpretation.” He uses the example of Whisenant’s seventh reason, in which he uses the symbol of a blooming fig tree incorrectly.
Whisenant received a lot of attention for his 88 reasons, and even went on to write another similar booklet entitled, “On Borrowed Time.” But despite all his reasons, the world is still turning and no rapture has occurred.
Saturday, November 3, 2007
The Cryptid Zoo
http://www.newanimal.org/mothman.htm
According to The Cryptid Zoo, “Cryptozoology is the study of animals and other creatures that have not yet been accepted by science as real. In other words, it is monster-hunting.” When I first heard this definition I immediately thought of the movie “The Mothman Prophesies.” This film features a creature that is not accepted as real. However, I found that cryptozoologists work to discover new types of creatures, and since, according to legend, there is only one mothman, it isn’t the ideal area of study. Also crytozoologists do not want to be confused with ghost hunters or spirit seekers, and if they studied the mothman, who has a lot of spiritual disturbances attached, it would be off topic for them.
Instead I found a creature that had earlier been featured in one of my blogs. The chupacabra or the “goat-sucker” is a disgusting looking creature with large red or orange eyes, big fangs, sharp claws on it’s hands and three-toed feet. It also has “a hind portion shaped like a kangaroo with oversized legs for jumping. The top portion of the body looks stunted and scrawny in comparison with its massive hindquarters.
Crytozoologists say that the chupacabra brings them much fustrations. This is because it is sighted inconsistently, and when it is the descriptions are extremely varied. I’m sure this lack of evidence is what makes this such a tricky study. The chupacabra is also frustrating because of its actions. As explained in my earlier blog, these “goat-suckers” attack livestock and suck out their blood like vampires. This inconsistency and disgusting act has caused the chupacabra to earn a bad name for itself, and therefore, others do not like to be associated with it. According to the article in The Cryptid Zoo, “People like to say that it popped suddenly into existence in 1995 and died out a few years later. In reality, researchers have found that the sightings, though less numerous, occurred as early as 1974, and that the Taino Indians had folklore about a similar being, the maboya.” Because of this, its existence has been kept under the table.
The chupacabra is a disgusting and violent creature, and because of that I am truly glad that science has not accepted it as real. I would hate to live in a world with chupacabras.
According to The Cryptid Zoo, “Cryptozoology is the study of animals and other creatures that have not yet been accepted by science as real. In other words, it is monster-hunting.” When I first heard this definition I immediately thought of the movie “The Mothman Prophesies.” This film features a creature that is not accepted as real. However, I found that cryptozoologists work to discover new types of creatures, and since, according to legend, there is only one mothman, it isn’t the ideal area of study. Also crytozoologists do not want to be confused with ghost hunters or spirit seekers, and if they studied the mothman, who has a lot of spiritual disturbances attached, it would be off topic for them.
Instead I found a creature that had earlier been featured in one of my blogs. The chupacabra or the “goat-sucker” is a disgusting looking creature with large red or orange eyes, big fangs, sharp claws on it’s hands and three-toed feet. It also has “a hind portion shaped like a kangaroo with oversized legs for jumping. The top portion of the body looks stunted and scrawny in comparison with its massive hindquarters.
Crytozoologists say that the chupacabra brings them much fustrations. This is because it is sighted inconsistently, and when it is the descriptions are extremely varied. I’m sure this lack of evidence is what makes this such a tricky study. The chupacabra is also frustrating because of its actions. As explained in my earlier blog, these “goat-suckers” attack livestock and suck out their blood like vampires. This inconsistency and disgusting act has caused the chupacabra to earn a bad name for itself, and therefore, others do not like to be associated with it. According to the article in The Cryptid Zoo, “People like to say that it popped suddenly into existence in 1995 and died out a few years later. In reality, researchers have found that the sightings, though less numerous, occurred as early as 1974, and that the Taino Indians had folklore about a similar being, the maboya.” Because of this, its existence has been kept under the table.
The chupacabra is a disgusting and violent creature, and because of that I am truly glad that science has not accepted it as real. I would hate to live in a world with chupacabras.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)