The Four Forces of Evolution Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

The Four Forces of Evolution - Essay Example It usually contains upper and lower cases, symbols and numbers. But it is not as strong as Passphrases. Passphrases are short sentences or sequence of words. Pass phrases are stronger and easy to remember. Though Cryptic passwords are strong, it is very difficult to remember it. If we write the password down somewhere there would be chances of losing it. So Passphrases are better than Cryptic passwords. Since passphrases contain 20-30 characters it can easily avoid attackers and it would also reduces the chances of having that in a dictionary. Another important way to keep our personal matters is by having multiple passwords. It is better to use different passwords for different accounts. One of the best methods to keep multiple passwords is to create passwords which have some kind of a relation. And you should make sure that the relation should be something that is not easily predictable. Most of us face difficulty in creating a strong password. We tend to commit certain errors while creating a password. There are some common errors that we make when creating a personal password. Usage of personal information as password, use of the any variant of the word ‘Password’, use of short passwords which are very easy to remember, use of most common passwords, use of nicknames and birthdays as password are some of the common errors made by people while creating a password. Creating a strong password is not very easy. We should make sure that we never commit the above mentioned errors. The more complex is your password the better it would be. Try to include symbols and numbers in your password to make it complicated. Changing password in a periodic interval would also help you to keep your personal information secure. Here is a procedure to create a strong password. First of all you write a sentence which is of more than 8 characters. Then you remove the space between the words. Once you remove the space you can intentionally misspell a word in order to make

Does Damage To The Environment Pose Security Threat Politics Essay

Does Damage To The Environment Pose Security Threat Politics Essay Traditionally the focus of security studies has been on the military and states, however with the end of the cold war focus began to shift to other security issues which had previously been neglected. The environment began to rise on the international political agenda, and numerous studies have been conducted to assess the impact environmental change can have on security. However, there is still no firm consensus on the impact it has. In fact, there is no real consensus on the meaning of security either, thus making this assessment problematic. The aim here is to establish whether damage to the environment poses a threat to security, and, if so, in what ways. This essay will start with a short analysis of what  constitutes an environmental problem, and the extent to which damage to it is a security issue at all, by introducing the ongoing debate surrounding the importance of environment on the security agenda (Neo-Malthusian vs. Cornucopian); Then I will present the two opposing vi ews regarding the focus of security studies (National Security vs. Human Security). This will be followed by an assessment of the different ways damage to the environment poses a security threat, both in terms of National Security and Human Security. I will conclude with a summary of the issue and my own perspective. The Environment and Security An environmental problem is a change of state in the physical environment which is brought about by human interference with the physical environment, and has effects which society deems unacceptable in the light of its shared norms  [1]  . Human behaviour is generating CO2 which appears to result in depletion of the ozone layer. This causes overheating of the Earths surface which is passed on to overheating of the core which is triggering increased tectonic activity which results in volcanic activity, earthquakes, tsunamis and the resultant problems including radioactivity. This eventually puts undue pressure on food supplies and other resources. However, there is an ongoing debate within the environmental security literature as to the importance of environmental problems and whether they should be considered a security issue. The neo Malthusian approach attempts to highlight the dangers of population growth outstripping food production. Arguably this would lead to a competition for resources, and ultimately cause conflict and possibly war, thus creating a security issue  [2]  . Cornucopians, or Promethians, believe that Neo-Malthusians exaggerate problem and that their pessimistic view is unnecessary because human beings will devise solutions to environmental challenges and that there is, in reality, an infinite supply of natural resources.  [3]  For the purpose of this essay we shall assume that environment is a security issue, not necessarily in the traditional sense of what constitutes a security issue, but indeed for a variety of reasons, which are often excluded or ignored. The term security is taken generally to mean the protection of people against violence, or the defence against all forms of insecurity; this includes economic and environmental insecurity. Analysts have focused traditionally on the challenges posed by war and belligerence, but today the area of interest has expanded. The UN Secretary-Generals High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change categorised the threats facing the world currently, and along with terrorism, transnational organised crime and WMDs, the panel included economic and social threats including poverty, disease, and environmental degradation  [4]  . Some would argue that environmental change becomes a threat when it endangers national security, others when it threatens human welfare. NATO adheres to the former, but this maybe is to be expected given its state-centric, military approach; whereas the United Nations is more a humanitarian organisation, and subscribes to the latter. Whichever, the environment is regarded increasingly as both a human and an international security issue, albeit for somewhat different reasons. While the focus of security has historically been on people  [5]  , with the development of academic International Relations (IR), it fell on the State, and the concept of national interest emerged. This is linked to the realist approach to International Relations, in which the interests of the State come first with the protection of national interests being vital  [6]  . In this view security is closely related to military power; therefore a strong Armed Forces is necessary if the State is to be protected from threats. Walker and Loader maintain that the State-centric approach is still dominant within international relations practice, characterised by an enduring attachment to the nation as the main actor in global politics. According to Page, the traditional focus of work on security has been on the investigation of military threats to the territorial integrity of a given state that arise either externally (military activity from another state) or internally (from subversiv e, and generally violent, activities of terrorist groups).  [7]   After 1989, and the subsequent improvement in relations between NATO and the former USSR, conventional understandings of security became less relevant. Simultaneously, humanitarian concerns were increasingly coming to the fore of national and international politics and policy  [8]  . This review of the concept of security led many to believe that the focus should not be on states but on people, and the welfare of humans. In 1995 a UN report stated too often in the past, preserving the security of the state has been used an excuse for policies that undermined the security of people  [9]  . The concept of human security is embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human rights adopted by the UN in 1948. The Declaration states that everyone has the right to life, liberty and personal security. Human security means safety from the constant threats of hunger, disease, crime and repression, and protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of our daily lives-whether in our homes, jobs, communities or environment  [10]  . Writing in 1989, Mathews argued for a broadening definition of national security to include resource, environmental and demographic issues  [11]  , claiming that environmental protection and national security are inseparable. In 1997 Buzan wrote about broadening the concept of security, to include human and environmental security  [12]  , whereas Kaplans article, The Coming Anarchy, centred on the role of environmental degradation and anarchy, and marked a decided elevation of the environment and security debate  [13]  . Environmental security poses a threat if national security is undermined Many traditionalists may find it hard to connect environmental issues to security. However, some would argue that environmental issues can become a security issue when national security is threatened. Environmental degradation leads to the depletion of resources and competition for the remaining resources can create conflict, which may in some cases lead to war, thereby undermining national security. This is a popular assumption in the security literature  [14]  . Ullman argues that resource conflict is at the root of most violent conflicts in history  [15]  . After a decade of research into the connection between environmental scarcity and violent conflict, Thomas Homer-Dixon reached the conclusion that environmental scarcity can contribute to violence and ethnic clashes, and these incidents will probably increase as scarcities of cropland, freshwater and forest worsen  [16]  . However, there are other issues to consider also. The most important disputed issue in past violent conflicts has been territory, and if climate change and rising sea levels lead to diminished land area, this can lead to conflict. For example, a 45 cm rise in sea-level will potentially result in a loss of 10.9% of Bangladeshs territory, forcing over 5 million people to relocate  [17]  . Furthermore, measures implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will also incur costs, which could be damaging to the national economy. Goldstone argues that some countries, such as Saudi Arabia, already demonstrate certain characteristics conducive to political unrest, and the situation may intensify as a result of implementation of the Kyoto Protocol  [18]  . Some observe that environmental changes lead to migration, which in turn can lead to conflict in the host nation. However, as Goldstone observes, the crucial element is not migration per seWhat appears to matter for conflict are those cases wherein migration leads to clashes of national identity  [19]  . Therefore it is less the movement of people and more the social and political responses to that movement that matters most in conflicts in which immigration is a factor  [20]  . Nevertheless, climate-related conflicts are most likely to occur as a result of migration  [21]  . As soils are degraded, clean water supplies are depleted, infrastructure is damaged and lives are lost, migration may seem like the best solution for many people. Rises in sea-level may also induce large scale migration in the longer-term. For example, with the predicted rise in sea-level, people living on the Ganges Delta in Bangladesh will be forced to relocate. Some may move inland, but many more may move to neighbouring India and Pakistan and previous migration of this kind has been a factor in violence in the region  [22]  . According to both Elliot and Homer-Dixon, environmental change can lead to conflict when it interacts with other social, economic, political and cultural factors which reduce stability in a given domain  [23]  . In fact, these other aspects seem to be far more important factors affecting the likelihood of violent conflict. For example, stable democracies with a high level of development also seem to experience a lower rate of violent conflict. Damage to the environment poses a security threat if human security is threatened While the majority of studies of environmental security focus on the way environmental change may impact national security, others would argue that this concern is misplaced  [24]  . Global environmental change may, in some cases lead to violent conflict, but it may also have a significant impact on human security or welfare. Insufficient access to safe water resources and inadequate food supply are detrimental to human security  [25]  . Furthermore, according to Smil, environmental security has become a htreat similar to that of global nuclear warfare as it shares two characteristics: both are global in reach and the effects of both could be highly devastating  [26]  . Although the impact of climate change can be felt in many ways, either directly or indirectly, there are a number of ways in which human security will be harmed by manmade environmental change. In the UNDP report of Human Development of 1995 it was stated that environmental degradation poses a major threat to human security. As many as 70,000 square kilometres of farmland are abandoned each year as a result of degradation, and about 4 million hectares of rain-fed cropland are lost annually to soil erosion  [27]  . The planet is currently going through a period of change; temperatures are rising, causing a melting of the ice caps, which in turn brings about a rise in water levels. Most of the observed temperature increase has been caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases, which result from human activities such as the burning of fossil fuel and deforestation. The Climate Change induced rise in sea level will deeply impact coastal areas and islands. It will bring about increased salinity of fresh water and increased flooding. Flooding puts 45 million people a year at risk due to storm surges. A 50cm rise in sea level would increase this number to about 92 million  [28]  . However, the rise in temperatures also provokes prolonged droughts, leading to desertification and severely impacting already vulnerable areas, such as sub-Saharan Africa and some parts of Southern Asia. There are also health impacts connected to the increased intensity and duration of heat waves. (eg. Malari a, yellow fever, dengue). Infectious diseases are currently the worlds leading cause of death, killing nearly 17 million people a year  [29]  . Climate change also impacts agriculture and the subsequent availability of food. The food crisis of the mid 1970s sparked a detailed analysis into the relationship between hunger, famine and environmental causes, such as drought, flooding and land degradation.  [30]  It is now well recognised that such events can tip already vulnerable local societies into acute distress. Almost 800 million people in the developing world do not have enough to eat, and a further 3 million in the industrialised countries and economies in transition also suffer from chronic food insecurity  [31]  . Poor or insufficient nutrition can eventually lead to sever health problems such as gastro-intestinal infections, measles and malaria  [32]  . In discussions of the possible links between environment and security we often find reference to water. It is essential to human survival, has value in economic terms, and sometimes strategic significance. Nonetheless, in 1999 it was reported that 20% of the worlds population already lacks access to safe drinking water  [33]  . Water pollution can be extremely harmful both in terms of health and economy; not only does it further reduce the availability of clean drinking water, but it could also cause extensive damage to marine life and severely hurt the economy, as we saw in the 2010 BP oil spill  [34]  . At the P-7 conference in 2000, delegates from the poorest nations gathered and called for water to be treated as a fundamental human right, not as a market commodity  [35]  . Not only does water scarcity lead to health issues, a human security issue, but it also can lead to violent conflict if nations are in competition over the resource, thus becoming a national securit y issue. Indeed, damage to, or degradation of, the environment results in resource depletion which, on the one hand, causes civil unrest, leading to conflict, while, on the other, causes famine and illness, threatening human security, or welfare. Conclusion Traditionally the term Security was used to mean State Security, but with the fall of the Soviet Union security studies has expanded to include other threats including environmental damage. However, so far, emphasis has been placed on environmental change as cause of violent conflict, due to competition over resources or territory, but there are other possible implications, such as the effect it has on Human Security. To understand environmental damage as a security threat- in that it poses a threat to human security or welfare- we must move away from the traditional view that security is a state-centric, military led, affair. While it may be true that environmental damage can lead to conflict, albeit in conjunction with other factors, we should also be looking at how damage to the environment affects people. As mentioned in the UNDP in 1994, Human security is not a concern with weapons it is a concern with human life and dignity  [36]  . Everyone has the right to live a life fr ee from insecurity. It can be argued that environmental damage is a constant security issue for some nation-states, communities and individuals. Not only can it lead to violent conflict, and threaten national security but it can also threaten human life and welfare. Some damage, such as climate change, poses cultural, health, and life-threatening risks comparable to the impact of warfare. We often see security threats as those which come from other states, involve the military and concern national security; however, environmental damage can become a threat to security, indeed, for many states it can be the most serious security problem that these countries face, because it directly threatens their life and their wellbeing.

Robert Frosts The Oven Bird Essay example -- Robert Frost

Robert Frost's The Oven Bird In his 1916 poem "The Oven Bird" (Baym, Vol. D 1188), Robert Frost chooses a title that presents a single, natural image of a particular species of bird. The title not only identifies this "mid-summer and...mid-wood" bird as the "singer everyone has heard" in the first line, it also establishes the "nature image" as a main theme in the poem. The bird's song presents images of "solid tree trunks," "flowers," and "pear and cherry bloom," while imposing its individual voice on the landscape. This motif is a defining characteristic of many romantic writers, including the transcendental writers of the nineteenth century American Romantic period. In his little book Nature, Emerson writes, "I am the lover of uncontained and immortal beauty....In the tranquil landscape...man beholds somewhat as beautiful as his own nature....Nature always wears the colors of the spirit" (Baym, Vol. B 1108, 1109). Emerson endows nature with everlasting life, beauty, and passion. Therefore, he feels that he (a nd everyone else) can realize and experience the beauty of human existence by immersing himself in the landscape. And, like the oven bird, he imposes himself on the landscape through his individual essence (in Emerson's case his spirit). Despite the initial parallels with the Emersonian persona, the bird's song takes life and beauty away from the natural images that it describes, denying the immortal quality of nature. In "The Oven Bird," several natural images, traditionally symbolizing strength and beauty, construct a romantic landscape. But, these images are individually deconstructed, leaving the natural scene as a whole barren and hollow. Frost crafts a poem that is dependant on nature for both its subject and it... ... he holds on to the romantic notion that nature reflects the human experience. Where Emerson says, "I am nothing. I see all" (1109), Frost would say, "I am nothing. I see nothing." Therefore, in "The Oven Bird," Frost reconstructs the romantic perspective of the nature image by removing the romantic ideals of immortal beauty and spirituality that are associated with the perspective, and imposing the modernist zeitgeist upon this traditionally romantic subject. Works Cited Frost, Robert. "The Oven Bird." The Norton Anthology of American Literature. Volume D. Ed. Nina Baym. New York, London: Norton, 2003. 1188. Emerson, Ralph Waldo. Nature. The Norton Anthology of American Literature. Volume B. Ed. Nina Baym. New York, London: Norton, 2003. 1106-1134. "Oven-Bird." Birds of Eastern North America. 17 November 2003. http://www.aboutbirds.org.html.

Daisy Buchanan: Victim or Villain? Essay

In Fitzgerald’s novel there is typically more focus on Nick Carraway, the narrator and James Gatsby, who the novel is named after, rather than the secondary characters. However, Daisy is in some way important, because she is what steers the novels course of action due to Gatsby’s love for her. Daisy is what influences his lifestyle and eventually his death. Some people say that Daisy is a victim of both Tom Buchanan and James Gatsby, but this interpretation of her fails to take into account everything we learn of her personality and the way she attempts to manipulate those around her to assure her own security and comfort in life. Daisy is responsible for her own actions. She allows herself to be treated the way she is by the other characters just to ensure her own safety and make it look like she is the good person. It’s just her way of seeking money and security: the two most important things to Daisy. When we are first introduced to the character of Daisy we realize that she thinks a lot of herself. ‘I’ve been everywhere and seen everything and done everything†¦Sophisticated – God, I’m sophisticated!’ She is self-centred, which is not one of the characteristics of a victim. There is more reference in the novel that shows Daisy being more concerned with money and material goods than any deep emotions like love. Gatsby saying that Daisy’s voice is ‘full of money’ is just an example of the evidence that suggests that Daisy is a self-centred character that cares about no one but herself. Daisy comes from a well off family, and that’s what she wants to maintain which is why she married a guy that can ensure the continuation of her background of comfortable living. The reader comes to understand Daisy’s motifs but Gatsby knew it all along. Once he had fallen in love with her ‘he had deliberately given Daisy a sense of security; he let her believe that he was a person from the same stratum as herself – that he was fully able to take care of her’. Despite the fact that Gatsby has money, Daisy did not wait for him when he went to war even though she supposedly loved him. This just goes to show that she is so obsessed with maintaining her lifestyle that she would give up on waiting for someone she â€Å"loves† to go and find some other guy that could give her that financial security. She obviously thought that Gatsby would not be coming back from the war. She didn’t want to take that risk. ‘And all the time something within her was crying for a decision. She wanted her life shaped now, immediately – and the decision must be made by some force – of love, of money, of unquestionable practicality – that was close at hand’. Tom Buchanan represented a lot of things that Daisy was after. He was available and not risking his life fighting in the war. She agreed to marry him because ‘there was a wholesome bulkiness about his person and his position’. She was attracted to his status and wealth and found security to her interests. The betrayal of the promise she made to Gatsby only highlights the selfish nature that Daisy tries to hide, which is proof that she is not the victim in the novel. Gatsby along with a many of the other characters are unaware of Daisy true nature, which is why he says that Daisy only agreed to marry Tom because ‘he was poor and that she was tired of waiting for him to come back from the war’, but Daisy didn’t know he was poor at the time. Daisy is not the victim but rather the villain. Later on in the novel when Gatsby was showing Daisy around the house he stopped at his closest and started pulling out all of his expensive clothes. If he did that for any of the other characters it would look like a very arrogant move, but he knew the effect it would have on Daisy. She ‘bent her head into the shirts and began to cry stormily’ saying that it makes her sad to see such beautiful clothes. We are aware that Daisy is a person who goes off into dreamland quite a lot and associates objects with symbols. If that were the case I think that she is associating Gatsby’s clothes with his wealth, which makes her sad because maybe she thinks that she could’ve had a much better (richer) life if she had waited for Gatsby instead of marrying Tom Buchanan. Some people may take away the responsibility that Daisy has over her actions saying that marrying Tom has made her come a victim to the crude force of Tom’s money. Daisy believed that Gatsby had money; that is why she loved him in the first place. At the time of her marriage to Tom, she had already promised to marry Gatsby, but she made the choice to break that promise and marry Tom. Even when she got a letter from Gatsby right before her wedding, she went through with it, proving that although Tom’s money may be a â€Å"crude force,† in the end she knew what she wanted. She knows that by marrying Tom the love that she could’ve had with Gatsby would be lost. This shows what is most important to her. Daisy has no morality, she id driven by wealth and marries someone for business rather than love. Later when she is reunited with Gatsby, she plays with his affections for her knowing fully well that she would never leave Tom. She was married and had a child which put limitations on the affair she was having with Gatsby. But it wasn’t as far as Tom was with Myrtle. It was all fun and games with Daisy, until Gatsby revealed what they were doing which made her realize she went too far even though she said that she would leave Tom. Some would say that Daisy was right to stop her affair with Gatsby and staying true, as a woman, to her wedding vowels, but if she had not betrayed Gatsby in the first place then she would be more of a victim than the villain that I am trying to portray her to be. The death of Gatsby has to be the cruellest thing Daisy has done to him. Breaking the promise and toying with his affections was nothing compared to hiding the truth from every one. She killed Myrtle which led to the death of two men. None of these suggest that Daisy is the victim, but rather, she is the cause of most of the problems that occur in the novel. She was able to keep her finance and comfortable family life by maintaining her silence even though it cost two men their lives. Daisy is stubborn and too self-absorbed. She should have attended the wedding, because she did have some sort of relationship with Gatsby and indirectly cause his death. Plus, Gatsby didn’t tell anyone that she killed Myrtle even though he had in a way slipped it out to Nick who was too late to do anything. Daisy is a manipulator and I think that Gatsby is much more of a victim than she is. Daisy is a character that is driven by materialistic things. Even though she had love for Gatsby money was of more importance which is why she married Tom. She is not a vicim of Tom or Gatsby, but rather, she is just a confused woman who pushes out anything that is in her way of maintaining her own selfish desires that reside in money and security.

Dr. Linda

â€Å"Your food is your grave,† said the famous writer Bernard Shaw. What you eat is not important. How you eat, what you eat is important! Human being is a complex, integrated mechanism of body, mind and spirit. You need to maintain them at the levels required. A fault related to any one of the three, disturbs the balance of the body as a whole. Careful maintenance as per proper procedures is required. You are careful about the external cleanliness. You brush your teeth; wash your body, oil your hair—but that is not the authentic maintenance. Your body needs to be free from internal impurities. This is done through the process of detoxification. The modern materialist civilization, the industrial and internet revolutions have changed the lifestyles of human beings in more than one ways. They are subdued by relentless internal as well as external pressures. New diseases, the names of which were unheard in the recent past, are cropping up. The book ‘Detoxification’ by Linda R. Page provides solid answers and satisfactory for your health-related problems– How to remain healthy, without succumbing to suppressive medicines and by cultivating nature-friendly attitudes! An herbalist needs to know, and this is a golden rule, that the nature provides appropriate fruits and vegetables at the appropriate season. Dr. Linda expounds the same principles in her book.   Nature doesn’t commit a mistake but we often do. Fruits and vegetables are the mediated capsules provided by nature in colorful packaging. The process of detoxification ipso facto means to possess thorough knowledge and understanding about this natural wealth. Next, the herbs assist you in the process of detoxification. Dr. Linda gives thorough and scientific details about the detoxification process related to various parts of the body, by using fruits, vegetables and herbs. Dietary plans play a vital role in recouping the original health from the attack of any ailment. Strict vegetarian diet is recommended, one week before you begin the detoxification procedure, advises Dr. Linda. Dr. Linda has the three-pronged approach, which is invaluable from the point of view of a practicing herbalist. Firstly, she has provided comprehensive information required to create safe and individualized detoxification program. Secondly, detailed instructions are given for cleansing and detoxification. Thirdly, she explains what a good cleanse means and how to direct the cleaning process for best results. Cleansing is an ongoing activity. It is estimated that about twenty-five thousand new toxins enter the environment every year. Therefore, your commitment to your body is not a favor that you are doing to it—it is your bounden duty for your own good and for the happiness of others, so that they will not have an opportunity to tend your sick body! According to Dr.Linda, â€Å"a detox program aims to remove the cause of diseases before it makes us ill. It’s a time-honored way to keep immune response high, elimination regular, circulation sound, and stress under control, so that your body can handle the toxicity it encounters. In the past, detoxification was used either clinically for recovering alcoholics and drug addicts, or individually as a once-a-ear mild â€Å"spring cleaning† for general health maintenance. Today, regular detoxes program, two or three times a year, makes a big difference not only for health, but for the quality of our lives.†(Page, 1999, p.14) From the point of view of an herbalist, this book contains most of the information and facts such as step by step instructions to guide through detox programs detox charts for special needs, information about â€Å"Green Cuisine†, herbs glossary of detox terms etc. Something dramatic and divine happened about Dr. Linda Page opting to become an herbalist.   She was interned in a hospital with a life-threatening disease, which the allopathic medicines failed to cure. She utilized this opportunity to make intensive study of the herbs, their merits and began to self-treat her with great success. She saved her own life and with the acquired knowledge, she is set on the task to save the lives of others. If an area is infested with mosquitoes, there are two ways of meeting the situation. Spray the insecticide and get rid of the mosquitoes. Or remove the filth, to contain mosquito breeding once for all. The second option finds favor with those who believe in natural remedies. Detoxification, to define its correct meaning, is nothing but all-out purification of body, mind and soul. Dr Linda begins her book on a moral and spiritual note and that is the correct and great approach. She writes, â€Å"Today is a very important day†¦.use it for the best that is in you, so that you will never regret the price you have paid for this day.† References Cited: Page, Linda R: Book: Detoxification – All you need to know to recharge, renew and rejuvenate your body, mind and spirit! (Paperback) 264 pages, Publisher: Healthy Healing Publications (January 15, 1999) Language: English ISBN-10: 1884334547 ISBN-13: 978-1884334542