16th Commentary - The Problem of Swearing

For this week's commentary, we are required to comment on the posting of another student's blog. I have chosen to comment on Adeline Tan's (3305) commentary on the article, "More Americans swearing, poll shows", dated 30th March 2006.

I do agree that Americans swear a lot, and that this fact is clear when one watches American TV programs. The fact that even the American vice-president swears is actually quite shocking, as politicians are supposed to be more or less civilized. Of course, it is quite probable that other members of the government swear too.

But as we all know the problem of increased swearing is not restricted to the US alone. Even in Singapore, one can often hear various swear words being utilized for a multitude of purposes. Swearing has become so commonplace that some people inject them into almost every sentence they utter.

One source of this problem is of course, television programs, especially American ones. With American culture being widespread around the world, is therefore quite unsurprising that even their habit of swearing so often spreads to many other countries. No one really likes to be sweared at, and some actually get very offended at the language used.

I agree with Adeline that reducing the amount of profanity spoken in television programs would help reduce the spread of the use of swear words, and that education plays a vital role. However, one must note that any attempt to eradicate or reduce the problem would still be very tedious and difficult, as the problem is already widespread.

Adeline's URL is : http://generalpaperblog.blogspot.com/

15th commentary - Global Warming

This commentary is for Week 5, and is on the question: Reflect on the causes of global warming, its consequences, the solutions and the problems that hinder the solutions attempted. The commentary will be based on the given articles in the GP Times, as well as my own background information.

As countless reports over the years have stated, the world is facing the worsening problem of global warming, and that if nothing is done to improve the situation, life on Earth could run into major problems. Some of the possible problems that scientists have predicted include a rise in sea levels that could be between half a meter to seven meters, more powerful and destructive hurricanes, greater droughts, and even a new ice age. Some of these problems may seem far fetched now, but research models have shown that many of these scenarios are actually possible, depending on the extent of global warming.

In fact there have already been some evidence that these scenarios could be starting to occur. A recent news article claimed that 2005 was the hottest, driest and stormiest year on record. Other articles have highlighted the melting of the polar ice, both in the north and the south poles. Chunks of ice, larger than ever before have been breaking off the ice shelves of Antarctic; the sea ice of the Arctic has become much thinner than ever before. The hurricane season of 2005 produced more Category 5 hurricanes than all other hurricane seasons, and it also produced the most number of hurricanes within a single season, and the duration of the season was actually longer than many of the recent years. The Amazon has been stated to be much drier than usual as well.

Where would all these problems be coming from? Well, scientists have also found that the levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is much higher than ever before. Levels of carbon dioxide had already been increasing since the industrial revolution in the 19th century. However, with more of the countries in the world becoming industrialized, and with larger quantities of energy needed, the levels of greenhouse gases have been increasing very rapidly. The industries of many developing countries produce great amounts of pollution that add to the already serious problem. The use of non-renewable resources like coal, oil and natural gas to generate electricity also contributes to air pollution. Amongst the three, coal is by far the most polluting. With many countries using coal due to its cheap monetary cost, the amount of air pollution contributed from this source alone is very great.

The consequences of global warming are actually very varied. The immediate problems that result would be the climatic changes that were mentioned in a earlier paragraph. But from those problems, more would result. Melting ice and rising sea levels would cause widespread flooding across many low-lying areas around the world, especially if the rise is of several meters. Countries like Bangladesh and the Maldives could see large amounts of land becoming submerged by the sea. If this occurred, many people could become displaced, losing both their homes and their livelihood. Droughts could kill thousands of people, due to starvation when crops failed. Hurricanes and storms could cause greater damage to the land than before, wrecking havoc around the world. Animals could lose their habitats; flora and fauna that failed to adapt to changes in the climate could become extinct. One example of this could be the polar bears of Canada, who face diminishing hunting grounds due to the earlier melting of sea ice in Hudson Bay. Coral, which are extremely sensitive to temperature changes, would become bleached due to rising sea temperatures.

The worst case scenario that may occur would probably be the onset of a new ice age. This scenario is explored in the movie "The day after tomorrow", where global warming caused too much polar ice to melt, halting the Gulf Stream and causing a massive temperature drop across much of the northern hemisphere, leading to superstorms that heralded the ice age. Obviously, climate shifts of such a sudden occurrence would not occur. However, the change could be much faster than ever before, due to global warming. Thus, I would not dismiss the scenario shown in the movie as pure fiction. If a climate shift does occur, humans would be in a great deal of trouble. Millions would die, and people would need to learn to adapt to a whole new environment.

How can we prevent the problems from occurring? Is anything being done to resolve the issue of global warming? This are questions one would ask after seeing the possible consequences of uncontrolled global warming. Well, the good thing is that many countries and organizations have started taking steps in attempts to slow down global warming. Some companies are switching to the use of environmentally friendly products, while others use recycled materials; Governments are taking steps to make their countries "greener"; International treaties have been drawn up to curb pollution... But how successful are these steps?

Well, there have been both positive effects from the attempts, but also negative ones. One such example would be the Kyoto Protocol, which is an international treaty aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Many countries have signed and rectified it and have taken steps to curb greenhouse gas emissions. However, many are finding the targets hard to meet. Furthermore, the fact that developing countries like China and India are exempt from the curbs makes the Protocol quite ineffective. This is due to the fact that both China and India are major contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. Another problem of the Protocol is that the US, which is the world's largest contributor of greenhouse gases, refused to rectify it. Without the participation of the US, the Protocol does seem very unlike to achieve great successes. The US also seems unlikely to sign any other treaty that could hurt its economy.

Another problem with the attempt to reduce emissions would be the fact that many developing countries are not able to afford the more expensive cleaner technology. For example, countries would not want to rely on Solar power for electricity generation when there is coal, which is far cheaper, to use. Some companies do not want to spend the extra costs as they want to maximize their profits. Some people do not conserve because they find it too troublesome to do so.

With such hindrances among many more, it is therefore unsurprising that the global effort to slow global warming has not gone far. However, all is not lost, as some governments have finally started to see the dangers global warming could bring. Furthermore, some people have taken their own initiatives to be more environmentally friendly, providing a small but important boost to the effort of slowing global warming. In this battle for the environment, every step, no matter how small, counts.

14th Commentary - Islam and Religious Conversion

This commentary is on the article entitled "Clearing the air over apostasy in Islam", dated April 14th, and other articles relating to the case of the Mr. Abdul Rahman, who was almost faced the death penalty for converting to Christianity from Islam.

It is worrying to see that one could face the death penalty for converting out of Islam, as this type of punishment is not seen in other religions; not within my knowledge anyway. Why does Islam have such a serious punishment for people who decide to convert out of it? Is there not supposed to be religious freedom in the world? A person should be allowed to choose what religion he or she wishes to believe in, no compelled to remain in one because their parents chose it for them when they were born, or because they had chosen to believe in it earlier. If one no longer sees the values of being in the religion, is there any use in forcing him or her to remain in it? I do not see the point of doing so.

The article does mention that the death ruling for apostasy in Islam is not concrete. This at least is a good point. But why the death penalty in the first place? Is Islam not a fair and tolerant religion? We all know that the image of Islam has already suffered from the terrorists who claim to be following the teachings of Islam in committing their horrendous deeds upon innocent people. By calling for the death of the convert, the conservatives have shown to the world how intolerant some followers of Islam can be. Furthermore, the article also stated that other Islamic countries did not even say a single thing about the issue, while other countries around the world raised concerns over religious freedom and human rights against the possible sentence. Such silence does not help improve the image of Islam. It is fortunate that Mr. Rahman had been spared the possibility of death for his conversion, but the fact that the reason that they gave – about him not being in the right mind when he converted – shows that Muslims still refuse the fact that any sane person would want to convert out of Islam. Yet they allow – even encourage – people to convert into Islam. Such actions only helps to show others that Islam is a monolithic religion, where its followers refuse to admit that their religion is something that no one would want to give up. No other religion has gone to show the world such problems. How would the conservative followers of Islam accept religious harmony then, if they see that all other religions are below theirs?

Thus it is vital that that there is a change in their ways, in order to promote religious harmony in the face of increasing terrorism. They have to stop creating the bad image of Islam being too structured and unfair. Show the world that Islam can be a fair and tolerant religion that protects human rights. I am sure Muslims will be able to do it.

13th Commentary - Scientific and Technological advancements and what they mean

The commentary is on this question: “Do you think science and technology has done more good than bad? Consider all the aspect, from the impact on daily life, on medical science (our health), on the environment, on ethics, on human nature, on the physical, mental and social and spiritual development of a human being.” The examples used are largely from the articles inside the GP Times.

We do know that scientific and technological advances in many areas have brought great changes and even greater possibilities to society, and the areas where such advances have occurred are practically countless. There are, of course, still many debates in the scientific community about possible problems and issues, especially ethical ones, of these advances. But overall, it is my opinion that the improvements in science and technology have brought greater good to the world, rather than bad.

New technology has made it possible for robots to replace humans in doing household chores, doing mundane jobs in factories, carrying out dangerous military missions, and many other things. Scientific advancement makes having babies after 60 possible and living to 120 look increasingly likely. These are just a few examples of the good things that the advances in technology and science have brought us. Our lives would become safer and less stressful, and we may one day be immune to the multitude of diseases that plague us now. Some mental problems could be gotten rid of through new medication. Such great possibilities are definitely good – not only for the people, but for the whole world.

The downside to all these possibilities would be the continued issue of ethics. Some of the research needed to speed up progress or to test the feasibility of certain products would cause certain groups to bring up the problem of ethics in research. Would the outcome be morally right? Is the research done harmful to others? Or is the objective in accordance to universal law? These are some issues that would often crop up in the process of scientific and technological advancement. One especially touchy area would be stem cell research. Many in the scientific community feel that stem cell research is likely to bring in much progress in the areas of medical science and the search for cures to diseases like cancer and AIDS. However, the research that is required would sometimes cause uproars over ethical problems, like the use of human eggs or embryo, or the methods used to obtain some of such materials. An example of such a case would be that of the disgraced South Korean scientist, Professor Hwang Woo Suk – The human eggs he used in his research were obtained from his junior staff, not through proper channels. Other ethical problems in scientific research included the carrying out of tests on patients without their consent, and the fabrication of test results. Such problems could actually harm the credibility of the scientific community, and may even lead to a setback, which would be bad.

Although the above examples of problems in scientific and technological research would seem to make any improvements bad or unethical, it is not the case. Majority of the scientists and researchers do not commit such offenses, and all of them would be aiming to create something that would improve human life, not make it worse. Thus, I would conclude that scientific and technological advances are good of people.

12th Commentary - Supersonic Travel Once More ?

This commentary is on the article entitled 'Sydney to London in two hours', dated 26th March 2006.

The article is about the testing of a scramjet, codenamed 'HyShot III', that could achieve speeds of Mach 8 - 8 times the speed of sound. The report also states the possibility of achieving speeds of Mach 10 by June this year. All these tests are supposed to create a new super-fast jet engine that could allow people to travel from Sydney to London in 2 hours.

I do agree that the success of such a test is a great step forward for high-speed travel. However, I do wonder how much different the new types of planes would be from the now defunct Concorde, except for the greater speeds possible. As we know, the Concorde was the fastest passenger planes ever, at speeds of around Mach 2. However, there were problems such as noise pollution that restricted the number of places the Concorde could fly to, and a high construction cost that limited the number of Concordes produced. Furthermore, the high prices limited the number of people that could afford to fly. Would new supersonic passenger planes still have such problems? How would companies make the new planes more economically viable? These are some of the questions the creators of the new engines have to solve before the dream of flying from Sydney to London in two hours can be fufilled.

Safety is another major concern that the companies will have to ensure. As we know, the Concorde was brought down partly because of serious accidents, especially one that killed a large number of passengers. If the new planes and engines can be safe enough, there would be no problem from this area. If that is so, then more would want to fly supersonic - just like the times of the Concorde.

It is my hope that supersonic fights would be achieved once more in the near future; faster, cheaper, quieter and safer than ever before.