Idhe and Greenhouse Gases

After reading the introductory material about Idhe this past weekend, I became interested in what other kinds of topics, on a more in-depth level that Idhe explores with his idea of Phenomenology. So, I visited his homepage and came across an article that interested me titled: Whole Earth Measurements . I focused on the first part of the article titled, "How Many Phenomenologists does it take to detect a 'Greenhouse Effect'?" It's a short passage that discusses and debates between the different ways that technology and humans have interpreted and are interpreting pollution, our environment, and raising temperatures due to CFCS and other potentially harmful chemicals.

In this article, Ihde debates between what really is harmful to our earth and what is natural. He debates how we use technology to measure Greenhouse gas and if maybe our calculations are based on faulty math, and maybe we are just not sampling enough data or looking at a big enough picture to come to conclusions.

Read the article and let me know what you think!

P.s. I know you guys have missed me, I've been reallyyyyyy sick :(

Wikipedia Controversty.

So this week I found a really interesting article relating to Wikipedia and it's entry on President Obama.

I stumbled across it while checking out a different article at wired.com.

Check it out, it discusses how since the president moved into offices pa there have been several ommisions to his page.

Do we treat Wikipedia differently than other wiki sites?

A wiki is a resource meant to me alterted by users for other users, but does this clash with people thinking that it's wrong to omit cotroversial information about our president?

Is it wrong that people are trying to save-face for our president by omitting his ties to controversy of the past?

Lexia to Perplexia: Expression for the Masses

At first, Lexia to Perplexia scared me. It was, as discussed on Wednesday, Stelarc like, and really out there. It was not very self explanatory and didn't interact with the users of the website as you would anticipate. After thinking about the concept though, and contemplating what a "scaled down" Lexia to Perplexia web site would be like, I concluded that writing that took alternate forms will be the writing that dominates the future.

It's easy to skim a 5 page article of jsut text, get a few points out of it and call it a day. But you cannot skim Lexia to Perplexia, nor can you leave the website without experiencing writing involving more than just the physical reading of words.

In the future, sites like Lexia to Perplexia will allow individuals of all interests and backgrounds to feed off information of others. An interactive website lets people, who might have not taken the time or energy to read a "text-only" document, to reap the benifits of literature and the resources of it as well.

If you think about, we experience mini-lexia to perplexia sites everyday. Check out the layout of facebook, you have photos, information, a place to comment, multiple pages, and links to other pages. If you took the presentation qualities of facebook away, each one would look the same. It would have a box stating your birthday, year in school , and institution, and then that box would be proceeded by a box stating, interests, hobbies, about me etc.

If each person's facebook was composed of blocks of plain text, there would be no captivating qualities of the site.

Facebook's links to pictures, it's ability to record videos, the the ability to comment, is what makes each any every one of us FACEBOOK ADDICTS. (more or less ;))

For some reason UTUBE would not let me imbed this link, but PLEASE check out this clip from Conon O'Brian. It gives a comedic outlook on the technology of our day.