Question:
Check out the articles “Science vs Medieval Thinking”, and “Air Pollution Northeast Edmonton as Bad As World’s Largest Cities” on our Moodle site.
Please read all links.
It will be interesting to see that both the original links I provided have become “unavailable” and that the article on “Air Pollution”, which was originally posted online, has undergone further editing.
Select one article from the list and create a well-structured, well-written essay. This means that it contains a thesis statement as well as clearly-organized paragraphs. You will then critically analyze the article (not summarize) and decide if it is credible.
Answer:
This essay presents a critical analysis of Spears’ article “science and medieval thinking”.
This article discusses the effects of science and medieval thinking on vaccinations, thus, helping to eradicate the diseases.
An article should clearly state the purpose so that readers can understand the article’s title.
The article “science and medieval thinking” shows that the article will focus on the influence of science and medieval thought on treatment and disease.
The title of the article should be clear and concise, not highlighting the points.
This article reveals the contradictory views that remain about vaccines and genetically modified crop.
The language used in an article is crucial for engaging readers, according to me.
To connect with readers, the language must be both professional and simple.
The article is a bit sloppy in terms of language and this affects its quality.
The graphs and the proportion of people who died from disease in the 19th century are explained well by the article. It does not go into the reasoning of those responsible.
The report does not provide any details about vaccines or genetically modified crops, but it does state the views of educated people in the 21st century.
To help readers, I believe the title of the article and the objectives must complement each other.
The title of the article doesn’t highlight the article’s objective.
Although the title of the article states “science vs. Medieval Thinking”, it fails to indicate which aspect of the topic is being discussed in terms both science and medieval thinking.
The title does not provide a comprehensive overview of the topic, which is explained through science and medieval thought.
But, I think the objectives give shape to the article and help it succeed in completing its goals.
Tom Spears’ article “Science vs.
The article “Science vs. Medieval Thinking” fails to set clear objectives throughout its entirety.
The article lacks a proper structure, which makes it messy.
The report looks chaotic, which makes it difficult for readers to follow the chronological order.
This report reveals the medieval mindset surrounding vaccines and genetically engineered crops, which led to outbreaks and plaque in the US.
To make an article professional, it must have a proper structure.
But, I think that the article’s structure does not necessarily define the credibility and quality of the work.
The article is not structured in a clear way, which makes it difficult to read.
The first section of the article focuses on the medieval conception of vaccines, genetically modified crops. The second part is devoted to the scientific aspects of vaccines, genetically modified crop that people have developed in the 21st Century due to their education.
To verify the authenticity of data and information used in an article, it must be properly referenced.
I believe that proper sourcing gives credibility to the research.
In the case of Tom Spears’ article “Science vs. Medieval Thinking”, however, the entire writing lacks proper referencing of the data.
The information provided by the author is interesting, but it’s not clear if the reliability of the information is an issue.
The author presented facts and information, but did not mention the source.
The article lacks references, which makes it questionable as to its reliability.
To me, it is important to explain the science and facts in order to improve the quality of the article.
But, I believe that a lot of data and graphs, rather than explaining, enhances the quality of an article.
The author presented the facts as well as the past and present perspectives of the society in this article.
Although the article can distinguish between science and medieval thinking’s impact on society, it cannot explain why.
The article does not show how education affects the mind and opinions of people regarding vaccines and genetically engineered crops, which helped to reduce the incidence of disease outbreaks or plaques.
I believe the article discusses successfully the different outbreaks of disease in the past due to the medieval thinking of society.
According to the article, measles was viewed as an itching disease that would diminish over time.
This medieval mindset did not allow society to understand the negative and degenerative effects of measles.
The article does not discuss how science has helped to treat the disease outbreaks.
Although the article mentions the science that helped to consider vaccines and genetically engineered crops, it is not clear how.
The author fails to mention when science actually helped change people’s views regarding the use of vaccines to treat the disease.
The author also stated that education has contributed to changing people’s opinions and perspectives.
According to the author, science and education have changed society’s perceptions about vaccines and genetically modified crops.
According to the author, the rate of disease spread has decreased since vaccinations have been increased.
The author fails to acknowledge that science and education are key factors in allowing people to abandon their medieval mindsets regarding disease treatment and genetically modified crops.
According to 11 Nobel Prize winners, the article presents data that shows that people are physically destroying golden rice that is vital for the body.
According to me, however, the author does not mention the rate at which golden rice is being destroyed.
The author does however successfully highlight the benefits of genetically modified crops and vaccines.
This essay reveals that even though Tom Spears wrote “Science vs.
While Medieval thinking successfully discusses the advantages of vaccines in treating business, the article also has many negatives.
The title of the article does not highlight the topic.
The article lacks the proper structure and objectives, which I believe is a major reason why the author failed to fulfill professional writing standards.
The author also presented data without proper referencing, both before and after science was used.
It is not clear whether the information used in the article is current or not.
This raises questions about the authenticity and credibility of the article, as well as criticizing its originality.
This article is lacking in coordination and interconnection because it has been presented in two sections.
The author failed to connect the two sections.
The author may not have considered the opinions and viewpoints of other people and has failed to explain the data.
The article’s authenticity and credibility are therefore questionable.
Therefore, I believe that the article’s topic is important, but the presentation, including the explanation, photos, and language, needs to be improved.
Refer to
Science vs.
Medieval thinking, Opposition towards vaccines, GM food persists.