outline

Argument Outline
Intro to subject
-Thesis: The rainforest is being destroyed at an alarming rate and this destruction should be stopped because the rainforest can offer many pharmaceutical needs, help slow the destruction being caused by global warming, and help increase species diversity on the earth.
-Why is the rainforest being destroyed?
-ground for farming/cattle grazing
-logging of rare hardwoods
-Rates of destruction
Argument
Why save the rainforest?
-Pharmaceutical value
-25% of western pharmaceuticals come from rainforest plant species
-Ecological importance for reducing global warming
-CO2 cycles
-Species diversity
-why is this important?
What is going on now to help save the rainforest
-World Land Trust and conservation efforts
Get the audience involved
How can you help?
Conclusion
Restate the thesis and information that shows how important the rainforest is to continue our way of life

Bibliography
Amazon rainforest. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.theopenline.org/environment3.htm
Causes of global warming. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.acoolerclimate.com/causes-of-global- warming.html
Cleal, C. J. , & Thomas, B. A. (2005). Palaeozoic tropical rainforests and their effect on global. Geobiology, 3(1), Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=18&hid=4&sid=e1fa890d-7c1c-4a40-9611- ec66f4d9419d%40sessionmgr11 doi: 10.1111/j.1472-4669.2005.00043.x
Rainforest conservation in action with the world land trust, international wildlife conservation organisation world land trust. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.worldlandtrust.org/
Rainforest maker. (2006). Retrieved from http://www.rainforestmaker.org/home/index.php
Rainforest destruction. (2005). Retrieved from http://www.savetherainforest.org/savetherainforest_015.htm
Taylor, L. (1996). Rainforest facts. Retrieved from http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm

Food Inc part 183-218

The part of the book by Joel Salatin was very good. I enjoyed reading it. He did a very good job of explaining how we, as consumers, do have a choice about what we eat, and he explained what the consequences are of eating factory-produced food. Joel does a good job of trying to reach out to all different kinds of people. I think his main audience is roughly 25 years old and up. I say this because it is triggered at people to own or rent a house, and who do their own grocery shopping. He does a great job of explaining how people that own their own yard can start a garden and grow their own foods and trade foods, but he also explained things that people living in apartment complexes, that may not have a yard, can do. I really was shocked when he said that he knew of someone who was raising hens for fresh eggs in their apartment. I don’t personally think I could live with hens running around my apartment, but it is good to hear that people are willing to try these things to help change our food system.

While reading other sections of the book I was thinking about the audiences. All of them seem to be the age group around 25 and older. I think it would be a good idea to make this same kind of movie and book for younger children. The children of our society are targeted by factory-produced food makers and it would be a good idea to show these children where the food they want comes from. This may help to get children to want to eat their fruits and veggies, and grow up to believe in a more sustainable way of eating. Maybe this would help bring awareness to their parents also since it seems we live in a culture that is sheltered from where our food comes from and what it is made from.

Positin Statment and Food, Inc. Part 2

For my researched argument essay, I have decided to take the position of pro save the rainforest. I chose this position because after researching about the rainforest I’ve become very aware of what it has to offer us, and ways it can still be used and not destroyed at the same time. I plan to cover the medicinal value, ecological value, and economic value the rainforest has. I will give examples of how the rainforest can be used to better local and global communities as long as it is still standing. I plan to also include ways that the average person can help save the rainforest.

I really enjoyed the “Why Bother” section of Food, Inc. It gave me insight to what I can do to help slow global climate change. I feel like it reinforced my want to continue recycling, planting gardens, and minimize the use of electronic devices (which is really hard to do as a college student). My roommates and I planted a garden last year, and I would like to do it again but I’m not sure it will be possible where I will be living. It was such a great convenience to have a garden. It saved me money also which was great! I loved having fresh veggies whenever I needed them. I also try really hard to recycle. It is hard sometimes if I’m not at my house, but I do notice how much it really cuts down on the amount of garbage I have to put out every week. This chapter just really made me want to keep doing things, and if possible do more.

I also found the “Exposure to Pesticides” part interesting. I found the part that linked exposure to pesticides to hyperactivity, behavior disorders, learning disabilities, developmental delays, and motor dysfunctions very interesting since we are seeing an increase in all of these today in our young children. This connection I think would really help change parents minds about going organic. If they didn’t want to before hearing this, I think they will now.

Food, Inc. Part 1

One thing I learned from the film was that it is possible for farms to be organic and mass produce food. The film showed how Stonyfield was purchased by Groupe Danone. They were able to continue making yogurt that was “organic” even when their company was experiencing a huge increase in demand. I guess I always looked at mass food production as necessary and the way it was done was the only way to produce enough food, but this segment of the movie proves that wrong. It was a refreshing part of the movie and I think that is why it stood out to me. It was reassuring in that food can be mass produced, can be healthy, and can be safe. In the movie they visited an organic farm, where the owner was experiencing the same kind of increase in demand and he was able to stay true to himself and his values and continue to grow pigs and chickens in a natural environment that kept them safe and healthy. Showing both sides of the spectrum, raising and marketing, really showed me how it is possible to change where our food comes from, and make all the food we consume safer.

The reading by Gary Hirshberg really sent this home for me. It was really interesting to learn how Stonyfield came about and became so successful. It is a story I think many farmers that are struggling to stay organic should hear. It is possible for them to continue working, even when they think they may go under. It was a great story that really appealed to my emotions because it was about people working together to create something better for all.

Another thing I find interesting is that in the opening piece Eric Schlosser says, “I didn’t really want to write a political piece.” I find this interesting because Eric Reece was the same way in Lost Mountain. It seems that many of these environmental issues and impacts lead back to politics and government regulations that are not being followed. I understand the difficulty of tacking something such as writing about these issues as they relate to politics, but it would be interesting to trace back the people and money lines that have made American companies into what they are today be it coal companies or major fast-food chains.

OU beyond coal panel

I went to the panel for OU beyond coal. The panel discussed different ways OU is researching or could possibly use to replace coal as our electricity source. Among the things they discussed were biofuels, electrochemical power, coal electrolysis, wind power, and solar power. Wind power, biofuels, coal electrolysis are all being researched here that the university. Coal electrolysis is a way to make CO2 in a safer, usable form. The carbon that is made is extremely expensive to buy, but we would be able to produce it and use it. The major issue that was brought up is that we would still be using coal. We would not be burning it so the emissions are gone, but there is still the fact that the coal must be mined and we should not allow coal mining to continue to run the way it does today. It needs to be regulated better and that is out of our hands here at the university. Wind power seems like it could be promising but not anytime soon. The research hasn’t been done to see if we have enough wind here enough of the time to harvest energy to power campus. Once this is research is done we will be better able to decide if wind is a good replacement for coal. One of the speakers talked about some conversions other universities have done. Some of these were geothermal power and burning of natural gas. To me, it sounded like solar energy was the most promising of the choices. It was said that OU would not have to pay for all of it themselves; a 3rd party company will most likely help out. We would just need about 10 acres for a solar panel field.

One point was brought up that struck me. An audience member said we’ve got to cut back before we can really move forward. I think this was a great point. So much power is wasted everyday on campus. We should start using things more efficiently and cut back on power where it isn’t needed. I remember being on campus during spring break last year. I was walking around campus at about 11:00 pm. All the lights in all the classrooms were on. Class was not in session, and would not be in session for a week. There was no reason for all the lights in all the buildings to be on. We need to be smarter about the electric we are using so we can find the most efficient way to power the campus in the future.

Research Prospectus and Bibliography

How much do you know about the rainforest? There are numerous undiscovered secrets hidden in the quickly disappearing forests around the world. Many of the pharmaceuticals we use everyday originate from deep in the green forests. The rainforests we know today are being destroyed at a devastating rate due to many different causes. These causes are well known, and have been studied deeply. There are many organizations out there trying to slow down or even prevent the destruction, but it is very hard to do considering all the controversy over land, money, and power. The underlying issue today is that there are very valuable resources in the rainforest that are being destroyed. If we can somehow stop or at least halt the destruction we may be able to find more plant species that can help cure many diseases that are devastating people worldwide. The other side of the issue is trying to help the poverty stricken countries that house most of our rainforests. To help these countries we are developing areas for tourism, and for job development, but to do this we must first destroy vast areas of the rainforest.
The development is currently causing more problems than it is solving. These countries allow richer countries to come in and develop so that their debt will be relinquished, however developing some of these areas may displace many families. Many of these people become shifted cultivators. These are peasants that move into the rainforest and establish small-scale farms. There is also displacement of the indigenous tribes that have lived off the land for hundreds of years. If we continue to hurt the people that know the forest, and know some of its well kept secrets, we will forever lose knowledge that could be useful on a global scale. The developers are trying to help bring poverty stricken nations jobs and recognition, but the money that is brought in often times does not make it to the people whom need it the most. The debt burden is one of the biggest reasons for development of these areas. The debt burden refers to the financially poorer countries that must make money by allowing the larger, more powerful countries to come in and exploit the natural resources of the land (Rainforest).
There are many statistics that show how little we know about the rainforest, but also how much it has given us. 25% of western pharmaceuticals are derived from rainforest ingredients. This 25% comes from less than 1% of the tropical trees and plants that have been tested in the rainforest. This statistic shows that the plant species that live in the rainforest are crucial to human lifestyle and survival. As we cut short the lifetime for the rainforest, we may just be cutting our time short also (Taylor).

Bibliography

Newman, Eric B. "Earth's Vanishing Medicine Cabinet." American Journal of Law & Medicine 20.4 (1994): 479-502. Web. 31 Jan 2010. .

"Rainforest Destruction." Save the Rainforest. 2005. savetherainforest.org, Web. 31 Jan 2010. http://www.savetherainforest.org/savetherainforest_015.htm

Taylor, Leslie. "The Disappearing Rainforest." Rainforest Facts. 31 Jan 2010. Raintree Nutrition, Inc., Web. 31 Jan 2010. .

"Saving Rainforests from Planters." Journal of Tropical Medicinial Plants 9.2 (2009): 418. Web. 31 Jan 2010. .

a forest returns

I thought the movie was very interesting. I did not know very much about the history of the Wayne National Forest. I found it refreshing because it was a success story instead of a devastating story. It was nice to see something re-grow and bring jobs and happiness to the area. It was also nice to see something the government did help people rather than hurt people. After reading Lost Mountain, I find myself thinking about our corrupt government a lot, but this movie was nice because it reassured me that not everything the government does is bad.

I also enjoyed the movie because it was about the area I live in. It was nice to learn about the history of where I live. I liked learning about the iron furnaces because I have seen a few of them, and heard about them, but the movie put all the information I previously had together. The history of the area makes more sense to me now than it did before.

Maywhoor and more rainforest research

David Maywhoor’s presentation really opened my eyes to the way so many things are related to the forests. I thought it was very interesting when he told us about how most of our projects related to the forest in one way or another. Some things, such as nuclear power, I didn’t see the relation to the forest until he brought it up. During his presentation, I found myself thinking about the way I was raised. My father owns a lumber yard, and we use a wood burning stove to heat our house. I never thought of the environmental impact my family has on the forests. We cut down trees from our own small “forest” we have behind our house and use that wood, but we also plant trees all the time around our property line and in the woods. I didn’t really think about what we can do to help our small woods stay safe for the animals that live in it. David reassured me that my family can help out even if it is just in our backyard, we can do our part to help even when we are using the trees as the main way we heat the house.

While continuing my research about the rainforest, I came across some disturbing facts. One of those is that the rainforest used to cover 14% of the earth’s surface, but now only covers 6%. Research shows that at the rate we consume the rainforest it could be completing gone within the next forty years. This rate is 1.5 acres per second. Another fact I found was that in the next 25 years, nearly half of our plant and animal species will be extinct or in severe danger of becoming extinct. These figures really struck me because in my lifetime I could see the rainforest become a part of the past. I never thought it would happen so quickly.

Something else that really caught my eye was this: 25% of western pharmaceuticals are derived from rainforest ingredients. This 25% comes from less than 1% of the tropical trees and plants that have been tested in the rainforest. This is alarming. It really makes me think about all the other cures that could be hidden in the rainforest that we are destroying so very quickly.

starting research into rainforest destruction

To start of my search I googled environmental issues. As I read through some sites the issue I kept seeing was that of rainforest destruction. As I started looking into this I came across the top five causes of destruction. These are development and overconsumption, colonialism, exploitation by industrialized countries, the debt burden of the poorer countries that the rainforest are often in, and the role of poverty and overpopulation. I am getting this information off of a website made by an organization that is out to save the rainforests. This website holds the rich industrialized countries responsible because of their “unrestrained development and the excessive consumption habits.” (http://www.savetherainforest.org/savetherainforest_015.htm)
This website explains what all of these causes are. The push for development in these third world countries as caused shifted cultivators. These are peasants that move into the rainforest and establish small-scale farms. Most of these people have been displaced by government coming in and developing their land. Some of the development is focused on tourism, which means developing large areas for hotels and airports. Colonialism refers to the rich countries taking over the poorer countries and taking advantage of their natural resources and interrupting the way the land has been taken care of for thousands of years before. This is really a main cause for displacing the many indigenous tribes that have lived on the land. This exploitation can be blamed on “corruption in government” according to this site. The debt burden refers to the financially poorer countries that must make money by allowing the larger, more powerful countries to come in and exploit the natural resources of the land. Many countries allow this because they have to repay huge debts to the richer countries. Poverty plays a huge rule because the richer countries that come in to help with develop the land, but this doesn’t end up helping the people that need it the most. If often times forces them into more debt.
As I continue researching these problems, I’m finding it hard to pinpoint a specific government organization responsible. I would like to use this problem for my paper, but I’m not sure how to find more information about the exact people responsible. There are many sites telling me the cause of the problem, but no sites that really tell me the sources of the causes. I’m not sure where else to look. Any ideas are welcomed!

LM part 3

According to Wendell Berry, the rational mind is focused mainly on survival by any means possible. It is very straightforward and focuses on making money in this case. It solves problems in an analytical manner, using only the facts. The sympathetic mind thinks about all sides. It thinks about how its decisions will affect the people involved. It comes to conclusions after finding the most honest and well supported claims. Reece uses his sympathetic mind all throughout the book. In the chapter “September 2004”, he uses his sympathetic mind when imaging the mountain side before and after the mining. He looks over the mountain and all he sees is grey fields and wastelands. The rational mind would have just seen it for what it is, a wasteland, but Reece thinks about how it was before and is able to look beyond the obvious and think about how it will grow back eventually as a grassy area that will be pretty again. He understands that the coal needed to come out, and he looks pass the money made from the coal to think about how to make the land beautiful again. He also uses his sympathetic mind when talking about creation and evolution. He talks about each topic while giving his opinion. He allows himself to come to his own conclusion and allows the reader to make his or her own conclusion based on information from both arguments. He doesn’t just suggest one side to be true without explaining why the other side could also be true.

Reece says, “It has been well documented, most recently by psychiatrist Peter C. Whybrow, that while Americans are four times more affluent than during the 60’s, we have shown no measurable gains in happiness. In fact the opposite is true: We are more depressed, more medicated, more frazzled than at any other time in our short history.(pg 241)” I think Reece includes this to show us that we may have more material things, and we may be more advanced but we are not making our lives any better in terms of making ourselves happier. I think he would say that we need to be more in touch with nature and the free things in life. This would make for a happier life. We wouldn’t worry so much about what is on TV, or what new thing we need, we would just be able to relax and reconnect with ourselves. I think it is important for people to take time away from our busy lives to just take a walk, relax, and enjoy nature because it is a very soothing thing that people take for granted, and I think Reece would agree with me.

Flow

Flow was a very interesting film about places all over the world that are in need of clean drinking water. It shares information about how large companies such as Pepsi, Coca-cola, and Nestle open plants in areas that have clean water such as rivers, streams, and lakes and take that water to bottle and sell. I did not realize how much these plants hurt the environment they are in. They take the water from the people in the towns and bottle it. Then they turn around and sell the bottled water to the people. This water does not initially belong to them, and that is where the controversy lies. They take the water that isn’t just theirs and ruin the streams and rivers in those areas leaving the citizens with unsanitary drinking water. Another interesting fact I learned in the movie was that people that live in poverty that get their water out of taps set miles from their homes actually pay more for their water than we (that can afford it) pay in the US. These places didn’t always have to pay for their water, and it was clean then. Now that the water has been “claimed” was large companies they can no longer afford to buy the clean water from the taps and they must go straight to the rivers and get their water. These rivers are very polluted and in some areas children will die before the age of 5 because the drinking water is so polluted.

I found the film very interesting and very motivating. Many of these towns have taken the bottling companies to court and have won their trials. Not all of them win, but some do. These people that fight the courts are just regular people of the towns that ban together to fight what it wrongfully being taken from their towns. It just goes to show that small groups of people can make a difference.

Lost Mountain Part 2

As I continue reading, I find myself starting to get more angry about this problem of mountain top removal. Reece does a great job throughout the book appealing to the readers emotions, but I feel like it is getting harder and harder for me to look at both sides of the arguement. I never completely agreed with the way they are mining, but I did still understand that we need coal and we will continue to use coal so it has to be mined. Now I'm just angry with the coal companies. The stories Reece tells in the second part of the book are really moving to me. The way these people are willing to fight for their rights are humans is very empowering. Sure it has its discouraging factors because they aren't winning battles, but it makes me wonder what we could do to help. Before I wasn't sure that they would care what I thought about this issue, but now I wish that I could go there and help them.

While reading Jack Spadaro's story, I was reminded of how hard it really is to fight these issues. The government basically runs these companies, so who are you supposed to get help from when you can't get help from the law. It was really an eye opener to read his story about losing his job, and the vicious circle of people who would do anything to protect the coal companies and make some extra money(as if they need it). It really brings into perspective how hard it has been and will continue to be for the Kentuckians to fight for better water and better living conditions because the government is so corrupt. These people are going to continue to be ignored and mistreated until enough people get involved in public offices to fight it from the inside.

Lost Mountain Part 1

Reece believes that the forest of Appalachia should stay intact as a whole. He gives examples about the wildlife, and the people that this mountain top removal affects. The first example is of the cerulean warbler. This example probably speaks true to a lot of the wildlife in that area. They need more than just a small piece of the land to survive on. The mining breaks the land apart, and therefore makes it very difficult for wildlife to survive. The effect on the people living there comes in many different ways. Their water has been contaminated. They are being poisoned and there is really nothing they can do to stop it. Their houses and land are being taken from them, and they are being forced out because the land is no longer a safe place to live. Another point that Reece makes in the book is that their lives are being destroyed, and the money the coal companies are making off them doesn’t even come back to help them. It is really destroying them faster because they use more coal than most places because it is so cheap there and this in turn makes the coal industry even stronger. It’s almost like a catch 22. They have to use the coal to survive, but using the coal is making their survival more difficult. Some of the people believe the coal mining is a good thing. It is one of the most predominant jobs available in the mountains, and their families have survived by being miners for generations. These people are just worried that without mining their families will have no income at all. They are willing to put themselves in danger as long as they can afford to buy food to feed their families. As an “outsider” it is very difficult to put myself into this debate. I see all the devastation that is being caused to the families, land, and wildlife, but I can also see how those people, who have worked in the mines all their lives, want to keep mining so that they can survive. As I don’t have any experience with this, I can understand why the people living their my not want to hear my opinion.

"Clean" Coal Websites Reaction

The site that appeals to me most is the Reality site. I think this is because the American power site has a lot of emphasis on money issues, such as how much coal costs compared to other resources, and how much money is needed to fund “clean” coal. I like the Reality site because it is more about protecting the people and the earth we live on rather than saving us money. I would rather put the money in to live healthier than save a little money now that could lead to my earlier death due to unhealthy emissions that we could have stopped. From what I understand CC technology just wants to find a way to keep using coal and capture the emissions and store them rather than just letting them out in the atmosphere. I think this would in turn cause more issues than solving them. Yes, it would keep the emissions out of the atmosphere but where are they going? We are going to have to spend more money capturing and storing them and that money could just be used on finding healthier ways to give us electricity. I think the only thing at stake for American power is their supporting companies going out of business, and I think they are just trying to hide the fact that they aren’t doing that much to better the earth. With the Reality website, they are appealing to everyone in the world and the affects that the harmful emissions have on our every day lives, and our health. The future with American Power just means rising costs for coal, and rising costs to keep supporting their research of how to capture the emissions, while the future with Reality spending money finding a way to help save our earth and save our lives. Logically, Reality is appealing to us by saying that coal is like cigarettes. Everyone understands that this means coal emissions are harmful and are going to cause us serious health problems in the long run. American Power also shows us how much percentage of our electricity comes from coal. They show this by state, and I think this does appeal to many people logically because for states like Ohio, roughly 85% of our electricity comes from coal. This could scare Ohioans into believing that we need to support their efforts to better the coal industries, because we rely on coal so heavily at this point in time. I think the audience for Reality is more of just ordinary Americans, while the American Power is more for other coal or electric industries. I think this because American Power shows more of the money side and is trying to get followers that would be able to contribute to their research, while Reality is just trying to get the facts out there and let people know about the harm that they might not have known existed. The American Power site also seems to be more a professional sales site instead of an informational site. The sponsors for the Reality site are all environmentalists groups, wildlife groups, and natural resource groups. The American Power sponsors are coal and electric industries. The interests of Reality are the American people while the interests of American power are the coal industries. This gives Reality more of an edge, because they appeal to people in America on a more emotional level. They are there to better our lives, while the other one is there to better the coal and electric industry and take more of America money. The emotional appeal of the Reality site for me was the dead bird. It really shows us that the coal companies don’t care that they are taking lives; they just want to make money. This helps their cause by making people aware that this is a serious issue and death does occur do to it. Americas Power did not appeal to me at all on an emotional level. I felt like they were just trying to find ways around giving truthful answers in the FAQ’s section and this makes me want to look into other resources to get my energy and stop using coal since those companies seem to be almost deceitful. The American Power website is colorful and bright and this tries to mask the bad parts of the coal industry while Reality is black and represents death and doesn’t beat around the bush about the dangers the way that American Power tries to do. I find Reality more persuasive because it appeals to people on a real level. It lets us know the truth about the harmful affects of coal emissions. American Power losses points with me because I feel like I can’t get a straight answer in any of the questions that are up on their page. I feel like they are just out for money and to show Americans how much money they spend on coal and this may be hurting their cause rather than helping.

Intro

Hi! My name is Kenzie. I am a Junior here at Ohio University. I am studying Biological Sciences and will be applying to Chiropractic school this summer. I hope to one day open my own clinic somewhere other than Ohio where it is warm all year long! I work as a student manager at the Nelson Market. My favorite movie is the Goonies. I've loved it since the first time I saw it when I was a little kid. I think it is because I love to go on little adventures and wish I could go on and adventure like that!