VG, hypoxia & 1 Deep British Voice
BRAGGING OD: Got our latest exam results the day before yesterday. First off, we were informed that everybody had survived. The teacher did not know whether to blame our brilliance or his kindness. But you know what they say about Swedish education. Or not.
Well, tawp grayde VG was set at 85% (while it is normally 80%, I think it was because they had had to remove one question afterwards or summat...) and I scored 86.84%! YES! SQUEE! Not expected, as this was a rather abstract and talky exam with a lot of "Discuss, dammit, discuss!" in it. :p Think this VG has been my life goal since I made a miserable little G on a similar course in 2005. :) MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
It was extraordinarily sweet to receive 3/3 points for my answer to a Q about "pros and cons of political conservation targets, are such targets appropriate and why, and did we propose other or complementary strategies?" And my answer was split into wee bombshell fragments all over the paper, too. Poor teacher. :B Here be my fatarse, 100% answer, outta the book via me brain, uglily (...) translated, de-messed, with teacher's stapled comments and supposedly approving underlinings in Slytherin green:
Good: -Perhaps the politicians are more likely to stick to decisions which they and not a hippy biologist have made.
-The targets may seem high, which makes the world realise the importance of protection, as even the powerful people set such targets --> everybody takes conservation more seriously and try to contribute to it.
-If people realise that the targets are too low this too can encourage widespread and general conservation?
-It is better than nothing. The populations may survive until the surroundings possibly become more eco-friendly, and then some can spread from the protected areas, which hopefully would not have become too depleted.
Bad: -The targets rarely ARE high (enough)! One hears 5% of a forest or 12% globally, but for many species extinction begins at ~30% of original population/habitat size, and cannot be stopped thereafter. I believe somebody suggested that 70% of the Earth be protected, and a study showed that the targets of scientists and experts are often set about 3 times as high as those of politicians. This may be because the political targets are often compromises and are held back by for example short term economic interests, although they might have been higher to begin with.
-The public may believe that the low targets are sufficient, so that conservation outside of protected area ceases.
-They say nothing of what is to be protected. ["could be said"] The politicians might mainly set aside land which is unprofitable to use, but it may have low natural values. A writer of one article pointed out the importance of protecting primarily hotspots (threatened and rare), that is, concentrating the protection to rain forests and the like.
Measures?: -Education ["good"] about ecology, so that also decision makers, voters, etc want high targets.
-The aforementioned concentration on hotspots. (50% of species on 2% of the land surface = rain forests?)
-Somebody said that areas should be protected based on how productive they are!
-General respect for natural values EVERYWHERE.
To propose 95% protection so that decision makers only could push it down to 50% would perhaps be an illegal scientific lie and falsification of results... unless one included the conflicting interests and the compromise into one's calculations?! ["!"]
A "few" Homo sapiens less could reduce the problem fundamentally. (The way there might include education --> liberation (of women), + education about ecology, that is, even in the lower grades --> creates necessary motivation... hopefully. However, I don't have the Nobel Prize for social studies/psychology.) There wouldn't be enough people to make an impact on X% of the Earth. Less bickering and agonising over decisions.
excuse the messiness!
["3 good (despite the messiness :) )"]
Hihi, I got something right. *wallow wallow wallow wallow wallow wallow*
Location: Comp room, Uni of Gothenburg, The Milky Way
Date: Friday, some damn year A.D.
Time: 4.13 pm
Oxygen level: *mumble*
-----------------------------------
4merry zombied students huddled round their almost finished project faintly become aware of a tingle that may have been trickling through the room - for the last hour? For the last 10 000 years? No one knows. :O
Classmate at other comp: "HIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHI! XD"
Group member: "L is tired..."
Group member: "What is it, L?"
Classmate at other comp: "It's just a picture... on this comp... HIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHI! XD"
Yozemind: *conjures image ofhardcore porn out of comp room experience*
Classmate at other comp: "It's a heron... HIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHI... XD"
Yozemind: *evaluating porn potential of herons*
------------------------------------
Group member (reading from project report): "'...and we also paid a visit to a hunting museum where one can view animals (stuffed) in their natural habitats.' Well, those weren't really their natural habitats though, were they? I remember seeing a wolf in a trap pit, and -"
Group member: "Aight, we'll have to change that sentence." *bangs delete button*
Project report: "...and there is also a hunting museum where one can view animals (stuffed) -"
Group member: "Stuffed where?"
Everybody: "HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWL! XD"
Everybody: *stare at comp* *sway*
Everybody: "ROTFLMAO! XD"
-------------------------------------
Everybody: *proofreads project report*
Project report: "There are two hunting clubs who take whatever part of the elk quota manages to escape the king."
Group member: "'There are two hunting clubs who manage to escape the king'?!"
Group member: "No, it says -"
Group member: "Oh!"
Everybody: "ROTF! XD"
Group member: "...who manages to escape the king's MURDEROUS SLAUGHTER!"
Yozemind: *wonders what she would choose out of being shot in her lungs, starving to death, being bit to pieces, jumping off the 60 m cliff in the project area, or sweetly drifting to sleep in anoxic comp room*
Yesterday was historical! I... I finally heard Sacha speak as himself. :D
*deep... british... male... voice... number 234248*
My comp speakers are dead, which hasn't been a huge problem until, oh, I got meself a fave actor/comedian/warrior/man who was SUCH a chameleon that in my 6 years of knowing about his existence I had never heard his real accent/voice, which, however, were bound to be fab, and, against all better judgment, I tempted myself by staring at silent talk show videos! YEAH!
*spank*
Sneaked onto dad's comp last night. It loaded Youtube-Letterman :D so damn quickly that I actually had time to hear Sacha say wannabe gangster before the comp was reclaimed by its rightful owner. :9
Speaking of our wannabe gangster - why TV hasn't shown the Ali G movie lately, to feed off the Borat hype, is beyond me. (Which does not say much.)
Well, tawp grayde VG was set at 85% (while it is normally 80%, I think it was because they had had to remove one question afterwards or summat...) and I scored 86.84%! YES! SQUEE! Not expected, as this was a rather abstract and talky exam with a lot of "Discuss, dammit, discuss!" in it. :p Think this VG has been my life goal since I made a miserable little G on a similar course in 2005. :) MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
It was extraordinarily sweet to receive 3/3 points for my answer to a Q about "pros and cons of political conservation targets, are such targets appropriate and why, and did we propose other or complementary strategies?" And my answer was split into wee bombshell fragments all over the paper, too. Poor teacher. :B Here be my fatarse, 100% answer, outta the book via me brain, uglily (...) translated, de-messed, with teacher's stapled comments and supposedly approving underlinings in Slytherin green:
Good: -Perhaps the politicians are more likely to stick to decisions which they and not a hippy biologist have made.
-The targets may seem high, which makes the world realise the importance of protection, as even the powerful people set such targets --> everybody takes conservation more seriously and try to contribute to it.
-If people realise that the targets are too low this too can encourage widespread and general conservation?
-It is better than nothing. The populations may survive until the surroundings possibly become more eco-friendly, and then some can spread from the protected areas, which hopefully would not have become too depleted.
Bad: -The targets rarely ARE high (enough)! One hears 5% of a forest or 12% globally, but for many species extinction begins at ~30% of original population/habitat size, and cannot be stopped thereafter. I believe somebody suggested that 70% of the Earth be protected, and a study showed that the targets of scientists and experts are often set about 3 times as high as those of politicians. This may be because the political targets are often compromises and are held back by for example short term economic interests, although they might have been higher to begin with.
-The public may believe that the low targets are sufficient, so that conservation outside of protected area ceases.
-They say nothing of what is to be protected. ["could be said"] The politicians might mainly set aside land which is unprofitable to use, but it may have low natural values. A writer of one article pointed out the importance of protecting primarily hotspots (threatened and rare), that is, concentrating the protection to rain forests and the like.
Measures?: -Education ["good"] about ecology, so that also decision makers, voters, etc want high targets.
-The aforementioned concentration on hotspots. (50% of species on 2% of the land surface = rain forests?)
-Somebody said that areas should be protected based on how productive they are!
-General respect for natural values EVERYWHERE.
To propose 95% protection so that decision makers only could push it down to 50% would perhaps be an illegal scientific lie and falsification of results... unless one included the conflicting interests and the compromise into one's calculations?! ["!"]
A "few" Homo sapiens less could reduce the problem fundamentally. (The way there might include education --> liberation (of women), + education about ecology, that is, even in the lower grades --> creates necessary motivation... hopefully. However, I don't have the Nobel Prize for social studies/psychology.) There wouldn't be enough people to make an impact on X% of the Earth. Less bickering and agonising over decisions.
excuse the messiness!
["3 good (despite the messiness :) )"]
Hihi, I got something right. *wallow wallow wallow wallow wallow wallow*
~*~
Location: Comp room, Uni of Gothenburg, The Milky Way
Date: Friday, some damn year A.D.
Time: 4.13 pm
Oxygen level: *mumble*
-----------------------------------
4
Classmate at other comp: "HIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHI! XD"
Group member: "L is tired..."
Group member: "What is it, L?"
Classmate at other comp: "It's just a picture... on this comp... HIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHI! XD"
Yozemind: *conjures image of
Classmate at other comp: "It's a heron... HIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHIHI... XD"
Yozemind: *evaluating porn potential of herons*
------------------------------------
Group member (reading from project report): "'...and we also paid a visit to a hunting museum where one can view animals (stuffed) in their natural habitats.' Well, those weren't really their natural habitats though, were they? I remember seeing a wolf in a trap pit, and -"
Group member: "Aight, we'll have to change that sentence." *bangs delete button*
Project report: "...and there is also a hunting museum where one can view animals (stuffed) -"
Group member: "Stuffed where?"
Everybody: "HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWL! XD"
Everybody: *stare at comp* *sway*
Everybody: "ROTFLMAO! XD"
-------------------------------------
Everybody: *proofreads project report*
Project report: "There are two hunting clubs who take whatever part of the elk quota manages to escape the king."
Group member: "'There are two hunting clubs who manage to escape the king'?!"
Group member: "No, it says -"
Group member: "Oh!"
Everybody: "ROTF! XD"
Group member: "...who manages to escape the king's MURDEROUS SLAUGHTER!"
Yozemind: *wonders what she would choose out of being shot in her lungs, starving to death, being bit to pieces, jumping off the 60 m cliff in the project area, or sweetly drifting to sleep in anoxic comp room*
~*~
Yesterday was historical! I... I finally heard Sacha speak as himself. :D
*deep... british... male... voice... number 234248*
My comp speakers are dead, which hasn't been a huge problem until, oh, I got meself a fave actor/comedian/warrior/man who was SUCH a chameleon that in my 6 years of knowing about his existence I had never heard his real accent/voice, which, however, were bound to be fab, and, against all better judgment, I tempted myself by staring at silent talk show videos! YEAH!
*spank*
Sneaked onto dad's comp last night. It loaded Youtube-Letterman :D so damn quickly that I actually had time to hear Sacha say wannabe gangster before the comp was reclaimed by its rightful owner. :9
Speaking of our wannabe gangster - why TV hasn't shown the Ali G movie lately, to feed off the Borat hype, is beyond me. (Which does not say much.)
Labels: environment, important, sacha baron cohen, uni
posted by Ratexla Kettleburn aka Yoze | 16:43
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home