Gillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/science/earth/is-a-two-degree-limit-on-global-warming-off-target.html?ref=science&_r=0>.
3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty, by Justin Gillis written for the New York Times, discusses the increase in the worlds climate. Negotiators are trying to keep the world below 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in the further over the course of many years. However, it is proven that the world has increase in one degree Celsius since the Industrial Revolution. Although that may seem small, it is a significant amount. Throughout history, global warming has been an issue but have only realized the consequences of it recently. It is said that if the Greenland ice sheets will begin to melt if global warming increased 1.9 degrees Celsius. “The climate is now out of equilibrium with the ice sheets...They are going to melt,” Andrea Dutton, a geochemist at the University of Florida. As a result of the Greenland ice sheets melting, the ocean would expand 23 feet over an unknown period. On the other hand, “the ocean, which covers 70 percent of the earth’s surface and absorbs considerable heat, will pull down the average. But the warming over land tends to be much greater,” (Gillis, page 3). Scientist still suggest the same ways to prevent global warming as much as possible. A climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, Richard Alley, said, “All delay is costly, but it helps whenever you start.” Global warming include extreme weather patterns. This can harm humans, animals, and pants. With ice melting, it puts many animals at risk.
I thought this article was very well written. It was very informational. But because there was a lot of information, it was difficult to read and did not define terms. The author could have formated the information in a clear way so that any person, most or less advanced in science, could fully understand.
Gillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014.
ReplyDelete.
For my comment on a current events response, I chose to comment on Mimi’s response to the article “3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty.” In her response, Mimi did many things very well. For example, she did a good job of explaining the importance of the article she had read. After reading Mimi’s response, I am now very fearful of global warming, something I believed to be not too serious until now. Mimi also did a very good job of integrating statistics into her response. By doing this, it helps the reader to get a better idea of what she is writing about. Also, it helps the reader to trust in the validity of the response more because real facts are being presented, not just opinions. A last thing that Mimi did well in her response was connect the story to the average person. By telling us what we could do to help, she is greatly aiding a cause that she believes in, and she is improving the world in the process. Despite doing these things well, some of the aspects of Mimi’s response could have been improved. For example, Mimi had several grammar mistakes in her writing, and this made it hard to understand her response at some points. Also, Mimi could have elaborated on her critique of the article she read because it was very brief and did not really tell us anything about the article. The last thing that I noticed about Mimi’s writing was something that really surprised me. This is the alarming rate that global warming is happening in, and the potential effects of this disaster. From what Mimi says, if we don’t find a way to at least slow down global warming soon, the Earth is going to undergo some drastic changes. We better start recycling.
Gillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014.
ReplyDeleteFor this current events comment, I chose Mimi's review of the article "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." In this response, I notices many things that Mimi did a good job on. For instance, by including direct quotes and statistics from Justin Gills, it helped the reader to see more validity in her review. I also felt she she a good job at explaining this article's significance to world and us, as now I am more aware and nervous about the subject of global warming. The way that Mimi summarized this article was also very well done, as it was concise but still explained some of the more complex topics in a way that the reader could understand. Although she did so many things well, there were also some aspects Mimi could improve on.First, in many places through this review I noticed grammar or spelling mistakes such as, "This can harm humans, animals, and pants." I believe what Mimi meant was plants, but little mistakes like these can affect the reader understanding of her response. Mimi also could have gone into more depth as she was very brief and didn't go into much detail. Finally, one thing that really surprised me was how high the rate of temperature change is. It hard to imagine that the Earths temperature has increased by a whole degree it such a short amount of time, and its also scary to think about what a great affect this will have.
ReplyDeleteGillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014.
Mimi’s response was very well written. One thing that she did good was how she used many quotes and this helped me to understand more clearly. Second thing that I liked was how she say about why global warming is dangerous and what is it exactly. So even if you don’t really know about global warming it is very easy to understand. Last thing that I liked was the summary of the article. She put a lot of information from article but it was very concise. Although her response was well written there are things that she could have done better. First thing is she didn’t really put her opinion to it. She says it was very informative but there wasn’t any her response to global warming. Second thing is she made a little mistake and that makes readers confusing. Overall I think her current event was very good and I learned that global warming is very dangerous and we need to do something soon before it get worse.
Gillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The new York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014.
ReplyDeleteI thought Mimi did a very good job reviewing this article. First I liked how she added a quote from the article because it really pulls the review together. I also liked that Mimi incorporated statistics in her article because it makes it more fact based than just opinionated. Lastly, Mimi did a very good job relating the article's topic to us in order to make us more aware of the issue of global warming.
Although her review was good there was room for improvement. She could improve on the formatting of her response and separate the summary of the article from the connection to us paragraph. This will make it easier to read and follow. Secondly, there were lots of spelling and grammar mistakes in he review that made it hard to understand at times.
One thing that really blew me away in her review is that the ocean will rise 23 feet. That is an insane interval and a significant, possibly, dangerous increase.
Gillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014. .
ReplyDeleteOverall, I think that Mimi did a very good job reviewing the article. She especially did a good job by pulling quotes directly from the article and expanding on them. I thought this showed that she fully understood what the scientists were saying. In addition, I think that her summary was very concise and to the point, which is what is needed when an article is very lengthy and wordy, as Mimi states in her critique in her second paragraph. Finally, I think that she did a very good job explaining how this could affect society. Not only did she tell us how it could affect us, but she also included statistics that backed up her reasoning’s even further. Although Mimi did an excellent job on the review, there were still improvements that could have been made. First, I think that she should have proof read her work, as there were spelling mistakes and some confusing sentences that I had to reread a couple times to fully understand. In addition, I think that Mimi should have elaborated more, providing her own opinions to the topic. Although, these issues are very correctable. Mimi’s article was very informative and has taught me more about Global Warming. I have obviously heard about the issue, but have never gotten the full explanation about what may be happening to our earth not only in the future, but now.
Mimi Buendia did a very good job reviewing the article, “3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty, by Justin Gillis.” Global warming has been getting worse throughout the years. One aspect that Mimi did a good job reviewing was using quotes to help explain the importance of the article. Another thing she did well was explain the background of this issue about global warming. A third thing she did well was choosing and article that was involved in our lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteOne aspect she could have included was more information and detail, it was a tad vague and she could have touched it up a little. A second aspect she could have included was better grammar and punctuation.
One thing that surprised me was how dangerous this matter was and how people should be more aware of it.
I think that Mimi did a great job of reviewing her article. I was able to learn a lot from her review, and I was impressed with three things in particular. I really liked how Mimi chose an article that is relevant to us, and where we live. It was interesting to read about an epidemic that could potentially affect us in the future. I thought that it was very helpful that Mimi included statistics and quotes directly from the article. I thought that this helped the reader understand the point of the article a lot better, and emphasized points that Mimi made in her review. I thought that it was also interesting that Mimi chose to review an article that had a call to action. After reading her review, I will be more careful about how much pollution I am putting out into the world. Although she did a really good job, but there were a couple things that Mimi could improve upon. First, I think that Mimi could make her review into three separate paragraphs. This would make her ideas easier to follow and understand. I think that Mimi could also work on her grammar. There were a few sentences that were difficult to understand, and could be improved. I thought overall that Mimi did a really good job, and I was really intrigued by the article in general. It is really shocking to think about global warming and how we have been negatively impacting the earth without even realizing it.
ReplyDeleteGillis, Justin. "3.6 Degrees of Uncertainty." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2014. Web. 16 Dec. 2014. .