Ever had a zebra try to chew on the back of your head? Well I have, and let me tell you it was really something. It all started when my family went to Natural Bridge Wildlife Ranch during spring break in Texas. This is where you drive through a park in your car, and the animals roam around and most of these animals were abandoned exotic animals that were given up to these reserves. Well, the last time we went the zebras wouldn’t go near any of the cars even though we can feed them.
Well this time it wasn’t the case. In fact they started sticking their heads in the car, which is what you are seeing in the picture. Well right after this picture was taken the zebra knocked the food out of my hand all over the floor of the car. Without thinking I bent over and started to pick up the mess when I started to feel something pull at my hair. I thought it was my daughter because she was right next to me and loved to play with hair. Instead she and everyone else were laughing, and then I realize that something was not right.
I tried to sit up, but something was weighing me down. It was the head of this zebra that was enjoying chewing on my hair so much. After I was able to distract the zebra it started eating out of my hand again until all the food was gone. It then went for my 2-year-old daughter, who quickly jumped in the back seat where the windows were rolled up.
So there we were in the middle of this trail surrounded by zebras, and without any food to give them. They wouldn’t move and made it impossible to drive away as you can see. We had to wait until another car came by for them to notice. Apparently they realized that these cars that had just showed up had food with them, so they quickly ran towards those cars and surrounded them, which let us make a break for it. Only problem was I had a cowlick sticking out of my head the rest of the day.…
Using Eco-Friendly Appliances In Your Home – How Does It Help?
MarieMay 16, 20200 Comments
Many countries introduced new laws and programs designed to help individuals and families to save energy, and to live in homes having a smaller carbon print. With the increasing worries about global warming and energy consumption, people are more and more interested about the subject.
The effects of uncontrolled increasing energy consumption might threaten the existence of humankind, especially in large cities and areas of the world that are heavily industrialized. In the past, these matters were of no major concern. Today, the increased rhythm of development imposed new qualitative requests from modern people.
Eco-Friendly houses – houses of the future
A building is considered green if by design, construction materials used, and technologies, reduce energy consumption and the negative impact on the environment. The concept does not apply only to buildings that integrate nature, but it has to be expanded to the old buildings and building concepts as well.
A greenhouse can be one build of eco-friendly materials, but old buildings are just as suited for being renovated to integrate environment-friendly elements. It has many advantages, including the faster building time and the reduced costs with energy consumption on the long term. The main characteristics of these houses are the natural materials that they are built of and the capacity to obtain solar energy for electricity and heating. However, a green house is a lot more than an eco-friendly passive house. Modern eco-friendly houses and appliances like microwaves and ovens are almost intelligent, with efficient insulation and recycling capacities such as a system to reuse rain water.
Even if the materials used to build such homes are sometimes cheaper, the overall costs which include highly skilled labor are higher. However, considering the lower thermal exchange coefficient these houses have with the exterior environment, they will save money on the long term. Plus, the capacity of self-ventilation of these houses makes them a lot more pleasant to live in.
The eco-friendly qualities of a house are measured by its capacity to protect natural resources and to satisfy high demands of its inhabitants in terms of comfort and health:
Saves natural resources: energy, water, soil
Reduces pollution of water and soil
Reduces the production of non-recyclable waste
Building an eco-house
While a common house consumes natural resources and throws waste in the environment, an eco-house protects the environment and it integrates in it perfectly. It means efficient lighting and unconventional building materials used, such as solar panels, heating pumps and wind turbines. However, it also depends on where the house is built. For the eco-houses built in areas where sun shines across the year, it is easier to use solar panels. In countries where sun is sparser, the energy of the wind can be used with the same efficiency.
Energy can also be saved though a smart design of the house and this is why the architecture of these houses is usually unique. The cost of designing the house is sometimes the biggest if you are planning to contract someone to build such a house for you.…
Saving the environment shouldn’t be seen as something so phenomenal, because if seen that way, doing it would mean so much resolution and hard work. Saving the environment is simply going back to the basics. It is simply remembering how uncomplicated we used to live, how we never knew fast-food, how we chewed our food slowly and talked over dinner, how we patiently rose from our couch or bed to change the tv channel.
There are several opportunities available to every individual at any time of the day to help save mother earth. These are absolutely not-scary ways that anyone is capable of doing.
First, we should remember to savor each moment. There is no need to rush even if there are a hundred and one deadlines to beat. We think more clearly and more intelligently when not rushed or stressed, hence, walking or biking to work shouldn’t be such a silly idea. We should use the stairs more often and the elevators and escalators only in the event of dire need or extremely weak knees. Motorized vehicles, as well as elevators and escalators that consume too much energy, were invented for faster movement but are not meant to completely substitute human physical exertion.
Second, we should take time to breathe and smell earth in its true form. Thus, we must try to lessen our dependence on climate-controlled rooms. Air-conditioning units use too much electricity and energy. After all, sweating is good for expelling toxins from our body.
Third, we should start remembering the joys of cooking at home and enjoying meals served on a regular dinner table. Hence, we should let go of drive-throughs and of Starbucks coffee while going to or from work. By doing so, we use regular dining utensils rather than styrofoam and plastic utensils that harm the environment.
Fourth, we must begin to relive those days when we used to spend our weekends and holidays in the park or in our village streets playing regular games and just biking around. Hence, we must try to stay out of enormous climate-controlled malls with innumerable fast-food restos that use styrofoam and plastic dining utensils.
Fifth, we become children again who sweat under the sun, run in the rain, and drink water from the faucet. Thus, we must endeavor to stop buying bottled water in the hope of slowly diminishing the use of plastic bottles.
Sixth, we cease to be wasteful and start to reuse and recycle items in the house. If there are unused clothing, shoes, tools, and furniture, we put up a garage sale or donate them to the less fortunate so these items that have lost their usefulness to us will be put to good use by others.
Seventh, we use a lot of imagination and creativity on how to put to good use old and dusty stuff in the house, in the garden, or in the dirty kitchen. Perhaps we can come up with an art form out of some old buttons and frames, and display that imaginative art form in our living room as an ode to the environment.
Eighth, we learn a little from the indigenous people, who believe that nature is the source of all life and wisdom. We therefore respect nature by always remembering to dispose of our trash properly, “greening-up” our own yard, and helping trees grow abundantly.
Ninth, the refrigerator is a huge consumer of electricity. It would be a wonderful opportunity to market or harvest from our own garden what our body needs for the day, and give the fridge some rest day. As all the …
Thump! That single bang of something smacking my window sat me straight up in bed. Four in the morning, I’d been sound asleep. Now my brain muzzily ran through the possibilities.
I don’t know why it latched onto “owl,” because my next thought was: “if an owl’s flown into the window in the middle of the night, there must be something wrong with it.” Or there’s something wrong with it now, after hitting the window so hard.
The bottom ledge of that window is over seven feet off the ground, so a deer was unlikely. Somewhat more awake, I fumbled for the light.
Bam! A second strike.
My fuzzy head was thinking it unlikely that the owl had knocked itself out, got up and flown into the same window twice. I wondered, with the force of it, that the glass hadn’t shattered.
I found the light switch, and reached for the window at the same time. Sliding the pane open, I saw the bird feeder mounted by the window swaying without a breeze. I looked down.
One big, black paw was clinging to the bottom windowsill by heavy claw tips. The sleek, furred face of a black bear looked up at me and our eyes met. Something wild stirred in my heart. My fingers were mere inches from her paw. I could nearly touch her ears. I had the strongest urge to reach out and stroke her fur.
A Disney upbringing is going to get me killed. My body had better sense than my brain, and slammed the window shut.
In the same breath, she dropped to all fours. Three loping strides, and she melted into the forest. Dark beast into black shadow. If it wasn’t for the swaying birdfeeder, you might not have believed she’d been there.
If the window was slightly lower, things could have turned out differently. Trying to give the newly arrived birds a break, I’d left the feeder out too late in the spring. With the weather warming, I should have known that the bears would be waking up soon.
Living on the edge of a national forest, the rules are a bit different than living in town. Pay attention to your surroundings – because of animals, not people. People are rare here. Animals are not. Watch where you put your feet. Give up going barefoot. There are often snakes or spiders hanging around the paths and their edges. Every summer someone makes the news stepping on a Copperhead in the middle of some campground at night. This ruins the evening for both the you and the snake.
You can have a compost bin, but don’t put food scraps in it. Doing that here will draw anything from the smallest deermouse to the largest bear. Don’t expect to use outdoor garbage cans. Don’t leave food in your car, even that fast food bag you meant to throw out.
Later that same year, in the heat of summer, I encountered the bear again. This time, on my way to the shed, I switched on the outside light. Movement caught my eye just before I opened the door.
Gorgeous as ever, there she stood about ten feet from my side door, right in the middle of the path. If I hadn’t looked, my dog would have been out the door in a flash. She’s small, so you can guess who probably would have won that encounter.
It’s quite possible to enjoy wildlife around your property and be safe. Just use your senses, and your common sense.…
Crime, and deviance from the norms of society may be as old as human society itself, but criminology, or the study of crime, remains relatively young. Among the groundbreaking work in criminology from the sociological perspective that was done in the early twentieth century is the social disorganization theory, which was propagated by sociologists such as W.I. Thomas, Florian Znaiecki, Robert Park and Ernest Burgess, among others (Schmalleger, p. 208).
Social disorganization theory credits a lack of, or diminishment of “the influence of existing social rules of behavior upon the individual member of the group” as a primary cause of criminal behavior and deviance (Keel, 2008). The early proponents of social disorganization theory, specifically Florian Znaiecki and W.I. Thomas, examined the effects of social upheaval and conflict upon crime, by studying the high crimes rates in communities of Polish immigrants in Chicago (Schmalleger, p. 208).
The main idea of the initial work in social disorganization theory was that these new immigrants, who found themselves displaced and occupying a new role in the social structure of their community, were unable to maintain their grasp on social norms (Schmalleger, p. 207). The effects of displacement into the new community, where most certainly immigrants who had perhaps been prominent or successful in their mother country, now found themselves at the bottom of the socio-economic structure, led them in some cases to commit crimes.
While the actual physical displacement of immigrants and the subsequent loss of norms that occurred featured prominently into the earliest forays into social disorganization theory, later work focused on criminal activity in relation to the environment, or community, which became known as social ecology (Schmalleger, p. 208). As this was being studied primarily out of the University of Chicago, the sociologists who studied crime in the rapidly changing city of Chicago became known as the Chicago School of Criminology (Schmalleger, p. 209).
Robert Park and Edward Burgess studied crime in the community by dividing the city into areas, divided up into concentric zones (Schmalleger, p. 208). These included residential zones, working class neighborhoods, business districts, and what they referred to as transition zones, which were often areas of low income, dilapidated housing, that often contained abandoned buildings, and where in a state of transition from residential to business uses (Schmalleger, p. 208). It was in these transition zones that crime rates were the highest. The ecological approach was further articulated by Henry McKay and Clifford Shaw, who developed the idea that crime becomes attached to specific geographic areas in a community (Schmalleger, p. 209).
When immigrants who populated the transition zones became economically successful they moved outwards towards residential districts or suburbs, and the vacancies they created were filled by immigrants who had just arrived (Schmalleger, p. 209). This new group experienced the same social displacement issues that served to create a continuation of criminal activity, and was referred to by Shaw and McKay as cultural transmission (Schmalleger, p. 209). This effectively demonstrated a relationship between criminal activity and geographical location in a community, regardless of the ethnicity of the groups resided there.
While much of the social disorganization theorists dealt in terms that seem ethnocentric, it is important to note that they were working in Chicago in the 1920’s and 1930’s, which was a city with a large immigrant population during a period of elevated immigration into the United States. These concepts, to my mind, can be applied to any city, and any ethnicity, as well. The social pressures that are prominent in social disorganization concepts, such as “Social change, social conflict, and the lack of social consensus,” can …
How many times have you been told you need to help stop climate change (supposedly single handedly)? I’m willing to bet it’ll be in the dozens. It appears that whenever you need to carry out a task, be it a simple, every-day task or a complicated scheme, the impacts of this task on climate change need to be considered, because we all need to ‘save the planet’ from our oh so disgusting and piteous selves.
The people that are telling you that you need to ‘save the planet’ and ‘think of the polar bears’ are usually single, middle aged women who have no job and nothing better to do than protest about something that they clearly haven’t thought through.
All it takes is a few minutes skim reading a brief summary of the earth’s history, and even an idiot can tell that the process the earth is going through at the moment – or about to enter fully – is entirely natural. We haven’t broken the planet, we haven’t messed it up as a species, all we’ve done is sped up an entirely natural process which we should easily be able to cope with and adapt to.
The protesters will tell you that when we enter the next ice age, we’re all going to be doomed, so we must start recycling paper and farting less. Firstly, we are still technically in an ice age, so already you’re hearing a falsehood. Secondly, if humanity has survived countless other ‘ice ages’ before now, and emerged intact, I seriously doubt that with our technology and infrastructure that we possess at the moment, we won’t be able to survive a bit of ice. Having said that, my doubts about humanity’s future increase every day. All it takes is anything Hannah Montana themed (amongst many other things) to crush any optimism before it has even germinated.
At the full extent of the ‘last ice age’, not all of the planet was covered with ice as you may have been led to believe. There were still plenty of areas of land with no ice covering them. In fact, the ice didn’t even extend to the very south of England. Indeed, it will become much colder all over the world, but we can easily adapt. Unfortunately for supposed lesser species, they lack the brainpower to adapt nearly as quickly as us humans and many species will die, which is extremely undesirable. Animals are cute. They keep us company. But it’s a natural process, and more should evolve to replace them – as went the entire history of life on earth before now. It’s not as if humans are wiping our every shred of life on the planet other than our own. Evolution will occur, more animals will appear (albeit in a long time), it’s that simple.
Everyone has become so caught up with ‘saving the planet’ that the measures they take interfere with basic practicality. You can’t print anything any more, because that one piece of paper you use from a pack of several hundred will definitely result in an impossibly high amount of trees being cut down. All your fault, Mr. Smith from London. The Amazonian villagers and polar bears will commit their lives to tracking you down and destroying you. There’s no escape.…
Laissez-Faire Capitalists & Environmentalists: an Unholy Alliance
MarieMay 5, 20200 Comments
Environmentalists and laissez-faire capitalists have formed an unholy alliance in order to deindustrialize the economy. Laissez-faire capitalists do not like the amount of money that has to be spent paying employees for work that machines can do. If there are fewer people working at the machines, this means more profits and you certainly don’t have to worry about that stupid OSHA if you take workers out of the equation.
Environmentalists are the kind of people who truly think that the world would be a better place if we did not use energy and thus did not try to make things. A true environmentalist would not be happy if we did everything we could to end the Industrial Revolution; they claim that they would be happy with the end of the Industrial Revolution and the creation of machine. I personally think they are lying. I feel that they would not be happy with any society–certainly not an agrarian society. The people who are environmental radicals want to kill the jerk who invented work. I can understand what the motives are of the laissez-faire folks are, but I can’t always say what the motives of the radical environmentalists are. I suspect some of them are motivated by an expansion of the public sector and feigned compassion via the welfare state and dependency.
Laissez-faire believers are beholden to either a stupid or naïve few that the world would be better off if we just ignore each other’s problems and whether or not anyone had employment/a sense of dignity.
This is an unholy alliance that has effectively destroyed the middle class in America and any nation that has a decent living standard for their citizens. People say, “Well, this can’t be an alliance if they don’t know about it.” This may be true, but there is an end result that is going to occur. Both groups seem comfortable with promoting the service sector as an alternative, but you have to plug in computers and still pay employees to do this, so I think both groups are again lying when they promote this as an alternative.
I am an agnostic. I make no apology for that. I do believe in freedom of worship, no matter how incorrect I may find you to be. I think many followers of laissez-faire economics adopt a certain level of moral relativity in order to justify their views. These people replace God and faith with the almighty dollar. I tend to believe that many of the radical environmental replace God and faith with Earth. I think replacing God and faith with the almighty dollar is wrong. I think replacing God and faith with Earth is wrong. I replace God and faith with the joy that I get from being able to work and trying to solve the problems of others. I guess I believe in my country as well and I hope the best for it. I would hope other people would adopt some sort of opinion that is similar. They do not have to however; who am I to tell people what to believe in? No one. Moral relativism kind of creates an opportunity for a person not to believe in anything. I guess the debate will continue.…
Behind every progressive movement for change offered by the present administration, one has to look deep and see what is this all about.You look at the outward message and then you ask the people who do the work, “How is this going to effect the health and safety of the American People?” Afterall, is that not the purpose of government to look after the public good?
Well, this latest piece of “newspeak” comes on the eve of the Labor Day Weekend 2006. The latest budget is going to cut the EPA library budget by 2 million dollars. The figure is not significant when you consider the costs of our numerous war efforts runs about that 2 million every 10 minutes of every day, but it is significant when this little drop in the bucket is an 80% cut. This leaves the EPA with about $800,000 to run all of its data collection, preservation, retrieval , administrative costs for an entire year.
The “newspeak” is that this cut is because the public is not using the libraries due to heightened security. The documents and reports are being digitalized and it is just more efficient. In fact the cuts will mean no public access. The cuts do not allow for the cost of dizitalizing all of these documents which is the size of the Rocky Mountains. The cuts also mean the preemptive closing of EPA library facilities in anticipation of these cuts.
The Public Employees for the Environment have tried within their of control to stop the closures. The scientist have sent pleading letters to the Congress begging for the funds and to stop the closures. See the letter to Conrad Burns the Committee Chairman http://www.peer.org/docs/epa/06_29_6_union_library_ltr.pdf
Across this great nation there are superfund sites dependent on the latest and historical data to keep the American people safe in their drinking water, air, and habitat. It would seem that even if you disagree with the concept of Global Warming or the possibility of harmful chemicals creating a toxic unliveable planet. burning the book is a harsh measure. As a member of the public while I may not travel today or tomorrow to a public library of the EPA, I would certainly like to know it is there.…
Creating for a Cause: Environmental Floating Cube Exhibit
MarieMay 3, 20200 Comments
Since being home, I have had the pleasure of going to art events around town. Out of all the exhibits I saw in Coral Gables, Florida there was one that really stood out among the rest of them: the PIAG Museum’s exhibit entitled “Earth & Water, our planet, our life.”
There were several things that made this exhibit so unique. First, there was the message behind it all. The theme is the environment. The purpose is to create awareness. Secondly, the medium which the artists use is very original. Each artist that enters is required to paint on a cube (made of non toxic material of course) that is 12″x12″x12″. The cube is painted on 5 sides and will float in the water on the dates and locations that are chosen by the PIAG Museum.
The most amazing part about the exhibit is that it is meant to bring together artists from around the world united in their commitment to take action to save our planet. The PIAG Museum is requesting thousands of artists of all respects to participate in this event. Whether you are a writer, painter, singer, photographer, or a designer the PIAG Museum wants your talent for this exhibition.
This exhibition has been hosted at several locations across South Florida such as Fair Child Tropical Gardens and the Miami Dade Cultural Center. The exhibit was also hosted by Disney World in which floating cubes were spread out across the waters of Epcot Center. Eventually the PAIG Museum hopes to take this exhibit to Washington D.C.
If you are interested in participating in this one of a kind event, or if you just want to find an exhibit near you, you can find all of the information you need at the PIAG Museum website. This truly is an amazing opportunity to show your love for the arts as well as the planet.
Gun Control? is it Possible in Today’s Gun Loving Climate?
Framing is an art. When an idea or ideal is “framed” well, we believe it. We feel it. Think of framing as using a word or a series of words to frame a picture in your mind, one that is pleasurable, painful, or frightening. Politicians are masters of this art. Republicans used the words “death panels” to frighten voters just as Obama used the words “horses and bayonets” in a debate to reinforce his slogan of “move forward, not back”.
Gun advocates use words like patriotism and civil liberties as framing tools. It’s very powerful and effective. Just read the comments after articles such as “Obama to press for policy changes after shooting”. One user states, “Whenever Obama offers a solution, it is another newly instated law that will infringe on one’s liberties and individual rights.” Of course, gun advocacy isn’t as simple as just using framing language. The gun manufacturing industry alone is a multi-billion dollar powerhouse, fold in the millions the NRA spends for lobbying and that is one huge gun-proponent brick wall. That type of cash gets politicians elected and moves legislation.
Nevertheless, gun control — or even a ban on assault weapons — would seem a slam-dunk after the horrific mass murder of little children in Connecticut. Surprisingly, one of the biggest responses was from gun lovers. Sales of gun soared — as is typical after a mass shooting — in the days following the CT massacre. Supposedly, the rush to purchase was due to fear of gun control. However, this is just a continuation of an upsurge in gun ownership. According to an article in the Guardian there have been more …