Pollution and Super Pollution

-G. R. Taylor

Summary:

Simple kind of pollution is everywhere in this world. The Apollo 8 did survey of the polluted sites of the world and found that Osaka and Tokyo of Japan along with the Los Angeles of USA were equally polluted. Among them Los Angeles has got the highest or nastiest air pollution in the world. It has got 34 tons of dirt per square kilometer in comparison to the New York which has got 17 tons of dirt per square kilometer. The vehicles collide regularly or go out of road at day time due to invisibility. Traffic police have gone to take fresh air in every four hours. They regenerate fresh blood by taking oxygen from cylinders. The oxygen is put in cafes and shopping centers also and people can use it from coin-in-the-slot machines. Similarly, student should also wear mask in their classroom while taking lessons.

The pollution has been becoming a great or serious problem these days. We also discharge gases, acids, metals and poisons which harm our health. Pollution may be one of the parts of environmental problem; but we have done much harm to the earth. We increased heat and dust particles, cut forests and pave our fields. Similarly, we destroy one species and promote another. We also increase noise and pile the trash. There is limit of all the above activities.

If we pile less garbage into a stream, it can be purified by the river. If we dump much more, it will lose the purifying capacity and the water will be polluted. It will take another hundreds of years to be purified. To dump a small amount of garbage into the water was accepted in the past; now it happens too much. So it is called as super-pollution.

It is also same about the impact of man in the environment. We have been collapsing the natural processes by increasing heat and dust, cutting forests, paving land etc. It is known as ecological catastrophe which is difficult to recover in the future. It will be difficult to return back to the original condition; or it will take so long to come to normal condition. As a corollary there will be a permanent damage in the environment.

1.   Put the following four sentences in the right order, so that they read like a coherent paragraph.

a.       If sewage is dumped into a stream in small quantities, the stream dissolves it and purifies it.

b.      Ten miles further down, the water is pure again.

c.       But if the large quantities of sewage are dumped continuously, the purifying bacteria are killed and the stream loses its power to purify.

d.      This overwhelming kind of pollution is called super-pollution.

2.   Drawing your information from the passage given above, answer the following questions in complete sentences. Your answer to every question should not exceed 25 words.

a.       Where do most serious smog and polluted air exist?

Answer: It is in Los Angeles, Tokyo and Osaka.

b.      Describe two effects of this pollution.

Answer: They are: increasing heat and water pollution.

c.       How do we alter the environment? Name three ways that the author has mentioned.

Answer: We can alter it by decreasing heat and dust, afforesting and not paving the soil.

d.      Name two factors, that the author mentions, which can lead to an ecological catastrophe.

Answer: They are: destroying forest and increasing heat in the earth.

3.   Read paragraphs 16 and 17:

a.       Point out the topic sentence of each paragraph.

Answer: The topic sentence of 16 is “pollution is only a part of the story”; and in paragraph 17 the topic sentence is “I call it super-pollution”.

b.      Say what order each paragraph follows for its development.

Answer: The 16 paragraph has got topic sentence at the beginning of the paragraph; whereas in paragraph 17 the topic sentence is at the last of the paragraph. The first paragraph has got the top down order and the second has got the bottom up order. Paragraph 16 has got topic sentence as its beginning whereas paragraph 17 has got it as conclusion.

-By Prem Prasad Sigdel

God in this Godless Universe

-Bertrand Russell

Summary:

The God was powerful in the pre-scientific world. It was difficult for man to exist in that age because they had been feared of divine displeasure. The evidence was earthquake, pestilences, famines and defeats in war. Humans were forced to believe since the incidents had been repeated. People believed that it happened due to the lack of humility when compared with the earthly monarchs. If they wanted to live happily, they should be meek, aware of defenselessness and confess mistakes. If you accepted the existence of the God, you would feel warm and cozy. Moreover, you would feel like the youngest child of a large family; you might feel pain, but not alien or uncomfortable.

In the scientific world, it was completely different. You believed on scientific rule rather than prayer or humility. This sort of power was much greater and reliable than the power that you got from humility or prayer. It was because your prayer couldn’t be listened from heaven. The power of prayer was not questionable; or it was thought to be impious if you questioned. The power of science had no limit like the prayer; or you could question as much as you liked. It was told that faith or prayer could remove mountains. It was false because, only the atomic bomb could remove mountains, which is now believable.

People might feel uncomfortable when they think about the world; the things like the cold or blown off sun and the stoppage of atmosphere could make us uncomfortable. Our life is small and transitory phenomena at an obscure corner so it is not better to think like that. These are monkish or foolish belief which the scientific man can’t/shouldn’t think at all. Rather we should think about fertilizing the desert, melting the Arctic ice and killing each other using improved technology. These things will do good for us except some failures. Rather we should take lessons from failures which have proved our power. So we are God ourselves in this Godless universe.

1.   Which of the following statements are consistent with what the passage says?

A.    In the pre-scientific world: man believed that only God had power over the forces of nature.

B.     In the scientific world: science has placed unlimited power in the hands of man.

2.   Drawing your information from the passage given above, answer the following questions in complete sentences (each within 25 words)

a.       To what cause did the pre-scientific man attribute natural calamities?

Answer: They attributed it due to divine displeasure.

b.      How do men in the scientific world acquire power over nature’s forces?

Answer: They acquire it by applying scientific laws or rules.

c.       In what ways is the power given by science superior to the power arising from faith and prayer?

Answer: It is superior because you can have various choices in science which you can’t get in prayer.

d.      Scientific knowledge has disclosed some uncomfortable facts about human life and the universe. What are these?

Answer: They are: the cold or blown off sun; uninhabitable earth and the limitation of our life.

-By Prem Prasad Sigdel

The Effect of the Scientific Temper on Man

-Bertrand Russell

Summary:

Seventeenth century men had got victory over their predecessors due to scientific inventions. They achieved more advantages with technical advances. Observations were haphazard before that time. The old traditions were accepted as facts by the people without any evidence. There were no proved scientific facts; rather people believed that they have been bounded by natural rules. As a result, they believed that the heavenly bodies were supposed to go in round complications as they had been guided by aesthetic taste. They believed that earthquakes and disasters happened due to sin. In contrast refreshing rain was considered as reward of virtue. Comets foretold the death of princes. In this way, they believed on aesthetic belief rather than proven facts.

Later on, the scientific mind had changed the point of view of humans. They believed on careful investigations of facts forgetting aesthetic beliefs. The ideas seem simple today but it would be a great revolution at that time. As a corollary, Kepler was killed as he claimed that the planets moved in ellipses, not in circles. Thus people believed on the super power of nature. They believed that the action of nature was superior that the wish or fear of humans.

The modern world has realized the fact of the past and developed highly. However, the so-called scholars of the Western culture are totally ignorant of the fact. The people who believed on new scientific knowledge were known as narrow and uncouth specialists.

The scientific technique had influenced the people rather than pure science. As a result the industrial revolution had been developed in Lancashire, Yorkshire and Clyde. At first people didn’t believe on it until it helped to defeat Napoleon. The explosive power was so powerful which spread to Russia first, then to Asia. Whether it is boon or disaster, it is scientific fact afterall which is undergoing these days.

1.   Which of the following statements are consistent with what the passage says?

A.    Men of the sixteenth century: believed that earthquakes occurred whenever man sinned.

B.     Men of the seventeenth century: believed in the careful investigation of facts to find out how nature works.

2.   Drawing your information from the passage given above, answer the following questions in complete sentences (each within 15 words)

a.       Why did, according to men of the pre-scientific era, earth quakes occur?

Answer: It occurred due to the sin caused by men.

b.      What was the essence of the scientific attitude with reference to natural phenomenon?

Answer: It was not legitimate scientific facts rather haphazard beliefs only.

c.       Who are the men who are thought to be embodiments of Western culture?

Answer: They were some so-called literary persons.

d.      To whom does ‘a tiny minority’ refer to?

Answer: It refers to some so-called scholars.

e.       In which country did the Industrial Revolution begin? Where did it spread?

Answer: It was began in UK and spread to Russia, then to Asia.

f.       What is the main cause of the changes taking place in the world today?

Answer: It is the boon of scientific temper on mankind.

-By Prem Prasad Sigdel

The concept of learning

By Prem Psd. Sigdel

I have read an article about the benefits of online learning in which the conclusion is that the students learn “modestly better” than those who have learnt through “face-to-face instruction”. It makes me more inquisitive and various arguments arise in my mind. I have thought whether the finding is effective or not. This is a research article which was published from USA; so I must think twice before commenting. Finally I have got insight that the argument is weak, unreliable, and partial. It seems that the finding is drawn forcefully; or it can be one of the sub-findings rather the article proves it as key finding of the article.

Online learning is known as virtual learning in which the use of internet technology plays a great role on it. In other words, it is a kind of informal rather than formal learning. Students have learnt with the help of internet or they have learnt from the materials which are posted in the Internet. They have got visual, audio as well as reading materials so it could be helpful for them to have knowledge about various aspects. They can even take help of different materials to be clear with the issue if they have expertise on Internet technology. It would be a great benefit for them if they can use it properly. If the knowledge about Internet is null or less, the reader can’t get the things what s/he has expected. It has positive and negative effects as well; however it depends on the purpose of they have used.

The informal process of learning has been guided with the interest of the reader; in contrast formal reading is imposed to the students. I have used as the ‘reader’ not ‘student’ to those who have used Internet to get knowledge. As it is informal process of learning it should have been guided with the interest of the reader and they must have been benefitted highly. The “modest” achievement is unlike the result of the research. It should have been “much more” rather than the modest.

In fact the use of internet should have given much knowledge not “modestly better” than “face-to-face instruction”. Internet reading is a kind of informal process of reading in which students can read about the subject matter which is interesting to them only. If it’s not interesting to them they would let it and try to find other interesting one. So the finding of the article should have much more effective rather than the modest in comparison to face-to-face instruction. The reader would read only interesting things rather than the course materials which we have prescribed in the formal course. In common the process of learning should be much more effective if we have taken it logically. Everyone can read or they have the interest to read the text which interests them very much. When the finding proves that the subject of interest is only ‘modestly better’, it can’t be the better finding in the backward society where there is no such access of Internet; neither can it be the key finding of the article.

There is a passage in class ten SLC question paper that the children who have born and grown up in the Hollywood would have negative impact on them instead of the adults. They would pursue the beauties, money, and luxuries so that would damage their childish quality. The article suggests not to raise children in the Hollywood. Whether others believe or not, I believe in it that Hollywood isn’t the place for children. It arises various meanings: Hollywood doesn’t need children; it’s a place of money and so-called beauty, it’s a place of adults only, and so on. The question comes along with the meaning that they have pursued the lifestyle and the conclusion of the passage is that Hollywood doesn’t suit for children or we have to take our children away from the shadow of Hollywood.

I would like to contrast these two types of learning. The former one is the non-formal way of learning and the latter one is the informal way of learning. The first one is non-formal because it has given some reading text that we have to read. And the latter one has been learnt with the experience what we have so it is informal learning. We have learnt it through our social practices. The first example has less effect and the latter example has greater effect on the children. So I have questioned that the informal learning process has greater meaning to the children or the citizen of any country. They must have been conscious regarding these issues.

The inquisition has come to me that the “slightly better” improvement in the progression is not so good finding or it has no effect at all. It also indicates that the children have no interest in reading rather they want to do something other. Or the children grow distaste against reading. So we must be conscious about it or we shouldn’t undermine the role of school or we call it as ‘forceful reading’. The children wouldn’t read unless we have forced them. The ideas of traditional education have been proved well. The concept of free reading has come on the favour of some marginal type of education system.

The finding of the article should be ‘excellent’ rather than the ‘modest’ one. So we must be conscious that the finding of all the research articles which should have been accepted with much interest. It indicated that it has damaged the quality of the students or it has instigated students to be diverted from formal process of reading to the informal and then none. Rather than reading they have been doing something other which interests them. Hence guardians should have been conscious regarding it. In other words, it has prone students towards negative aspects rather than positive.

Finally, I would like to conclude that the way of reading may be different but we should have taken the responsibility of the children to teach. If we don’t have guidance the children will do anything what they like. It also concludes that face-to-face learning is much more effective which has no negative aspects in human life.