“The Sea Longs for Red Devils”
- William Gilly describes a Kraken as “the mythical squid beast with ship-dooming tentacles.” Do you think he uses too much detail in describing the Kraken? Explain. Does that sentence follow good scientific writing in terms of preciseness and the level of detail?
- The author says, “Humboldt squid are enigmatic.” Do you think enigmatic is the right word to use to describe the squid? If yes, state some examples of why you believe this. If not, what word would you use? Science writing uses simple words rather than complex words; would this be an example of a complex word or would the normal, educated reader understand?
- According to the article, what seems to be the reoccurring reason why the squid have left their normal homes in the Sea of Cortez in Baja California, Mexico? What other reasons does this article say could also cause the squid to leave?
- Danna Staaf studied Humboldt squid on a summer research cruise in the Gulf of California. Most of the squid that her team caught were one year old. How do researchers tell how old a squid is? What comparison, in the form of a metaphor, did the author use to describe this?
- Describe the experiment that Danna Staaf and Gilly’s team came up with and how they studied the squid. What were the results? The article said, “Squid dislike being trapped… when you put one in an abnormal situation, they get totally freaked out.” Do you think they got accurate results based on how they studied the squid, or do you think the squid were too scared, which then gave them non-accurate results?
- What effects do the lack of squid have on fishers? The article mentioned, “Vela Arreola and his colleagues petitioned the government to declare the first state of emergency for squid fisheries, similar to what’s done for farmers during severe droughts.” Do you think the government should get involved and fund them or would that not be considered “fair?”
- Overall, do you think this was good science writing? Give three examples for why this was good science writing or what should have been changed to better the article.
“A Fragile Empire”
- Good science writing is precise and detailed enough to make a point to the reader, but not to get too confusing. The author, Jennifer Holland explained the Great Barrier Reef as, “the vast expanse of coral, from staghorn stalks and wave-smoothed plates to mitt-shaped boulders draped with nubby brown corals as leathery as saddles.” Would you have a good picture of the reef with this detail? Is there too much detail here, that you feel overwhelmed?
- After explaining the Great Barrier Reef, Holland uses a story about British explorer, James Cook, and his discovery of the reef after running his ship into it. How is this story useful in grabbing the reader’s attention? How does this story predict the later issues the reef will have with too many travelers?
- What are the building blocks of coral reefs? What conditions are best for these building blocks to grow?
- The “major bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef” was linked to what type of year (discussed in class by Dr. Wolfe) in 1997-98? Holland says that this type of event may begin to occur every year, wiping out the reef within 50 years. Do you think this claim is accurate? Is there enough data to back up this prediction? If so, what evidence does Holland give?
- Charlie Veron says, “coral survival is possible long-term if the onslaughts against reefs are halted – soon.” What types of onslaughts are occurring? Do you think onslaught is the right word to describe these things?
- After all the disasters at the reef, how will the reef recover? Holland writes about the things “high on the to-do list.” How is she objective/not objective in writing the conclusion to the article? Are the conclusions supported by data?