Year 8 - Computing

Online classroom for the fabulous Year 8's

Page 2 of 19

The Battle of Los Angeles

 

Intro

Is The Battle of Los Angles real? I will be giving good info for and against this argument of the battle of Los Angeles.

The battle of Los Angles, also known as The Great Los Angeles Air Raid  happened on the night of 24th February until 25th February 1942, the myth started as it was reported that many witnesses had seen a round unidentified object in the sky. There are many myths of what happened that night, including UFO’s and weather balloons said Wikipedia.

Against

The round object seen in the sky was never found or identified said Blastr.com. It was reported that at this time there were a swarm of planes in the sky (25-200) but no bombs were dropped over the Metropolitan area.

The Army and Navy could never agree what happened on this night. It was reported in the papers that the Army were embarrassed that they sent the planes in before they were ready so action was not taken.

Speculation was that it was “Invasion Jitters” as 79 days earlier the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbour.

For

The Battle of Los Angeles claimed six lives. Rational Wiki said three were killed by friendly fire and three people suffered heat attacks during the siege.

There were many eye witnesses in LA that claim they saw The Battle of Los Angeles.

At the time there were no reports in the newspapers of weather balloons or UFO’s.

Conclusion

After reading Wikipedia which is normally a reliable source of information, I think that the Japanese did fly over but did not bomb Los Angeles but it was the gun fire from Los Angeles trying to protect their country that killed the three people by accident.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar

Is Area 51 real or a load of rubbish?

intro
Today i’m bringing you the topic of area 51. Are there real aliens on this plant? Or are the American military trying to make America great? Stay turned for more!

arguments for:

According to “top 10 facts about  Area 51” real aliens have been spotted during the 2nd world war. The fact that it is located 80 miles northwest of Las Vegas makes it believable .  According to “proof of aliens” at the scene there was flashing lights and an mini earthquake. Area 51 has the most security in the world, the ground is covered by armed troupes and in the air there are air traffic patrol.

arguments against:

I couldn’t find any sites but i have a  theory of my own. I think that it was a huge bomb and the American military saw this as a great opportunity to make America the greatest country in the world. Even though “the crash” was in, Roswell, New Mexico. This could just be a scam to make people believe that America has real life aliens. All pictures look in-treeing but it could be the art of editing

Conclusion:

Personally, I think its fake and should be uncovered. However, if it was revealed to be true, it would be a massive break for scientists if there really are ALIENS!

 


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar

Did Aliens Make The Egyptian Pyramids

Introduction:

Who built the Egyptian Pyramids? Was it aliens? The Egyptian Pyramids are more than 4,000 years old and belongs to the people who work in the Pyramids of Giza. How do we know that the Egyptian pyramids were made by slaves? According to the author Keith Mayes there are two million blocks of stone which weigh from 2.5 tons up to 50 tons this is what you need to make the pyramids. Also the four corners of the Pyramids are almost a perfect angle. Is it possible for just men to do that? Could aliens have built the Egyptian Pyramids?

Argument For:

According to a website called Exemplore. Aliens from another planet may have come to earth and contributed to the construction of the Egyptian pyramids. Reasons why this is true are how would just men with no technology move millions of heavy stone blocks from apparently a place miles away? How were the blocks transported? By man? The pyramids are so accurately aligned with the points of the compass that only aliens could have achieved this. This is because back then we did not have machines for example: cranes and other machines like that. Some say that only technology today could have allowed them to create a stone structure like the pyramids.

Arguments Against:

This website called The Eloquent Peasant says that the pyramids of Giza were built 4500 years ago and that people back then couldn’t have been skilled enough to do it. But they are ignoring the fact that developments were happening all those years ago. The Egyptians made many brilliant inventions such as: paper and ink these we still use today this proves that they were capable of making inventions themselves. This means they were capable of doing allot such as building the pyramids in Egypt.  Also to say that because we do not know exactly how the pyramids were built does not mean that aliens built them.

Conclusion:

In conclusion I think that the pyramids were man made. This is because if aliens did come and help with the building would we not still be in contact with them? Also I think the Egyptians were perfectly able to carry allot of heavy block if they had that many people. Another reason is they had made a few things in there time which could have help them with building the Pyramids such as:

The copper pickaxes, chisels and granite hammers. This proves that they did have a few tools that could have helped them with the building of the pyramids.

Did Robin Hood exist?

Introduction

There is a legend about Robin Hood that he would rob the rich and then give the money to the poor.  He lived during the reign of Richard the Lionheart and married Maid Marian at st Mary’s church in Edwinstowe He would go to the woods a lot but there were forest laws that were unpopular. The stories of Robin Hood have apparently been told by a common folk. But some believe he did exist but some didn’t. But have you heard of him or maybe even seen him?

Arguments for

Some people say that Robin Hood did exist  because it would have been told by a common folk. But apparently they  say that you can still see the grave of Little John ( the man who tried to save Robin hood). Not much of his career is known but it is said that Maid Marion was not mentioned in the story for a bit and got added at later date. Some people think of him as the Prince of thieves! There possibly could be evidence but it was soo far back in time.

Arguments against

Stories change as they get passed on to other people. But some people think it is a myth got reinvented. There is no evidence to show that he didn’t exist. Some people say that Robin Hood does not exist because the obsession with identifying the real Robin Hood is misguided and that the name Robin Hood existed. The name Robin Hood apparently is not an uncommon name but is more likely the name they gave to make the character sound more realistic. They think Robin Hood is just a myth and nothing more.

Conclusion

I think that Robin Hood does not exist because stories do change a lot through time. When they get passed on people change stories to  story better. I also think that it doesn’t sound realistic but that’s just my opinion. On the other hand you can apparently see the grave of Little John who was also a friend to Robin Hood.  I hope this has helped you with this myth! What do you think?

 

Robin Hood – Is this story true, or is it just fiction

Introduction

There is a legend told that a man named Robin Hood lived through 14th Century; legend has it that he was an outlaw living in Sherwood Forest with his ‘Merry Men’. But this myth has a good chance of not existing. Robin Hood is well known for stealing from rich travellers and sharing this among the poor area. Legend says that he was around at the time of Richard I the lion-heart. But Robin Hood had an enemy, one that was more important and had a high position in Nottingham; the Sherriff of Nottingham. He apparently had a spouse: Maid Marion.  Maybe Robin Hood did exist but not the way we all think he did, or could everything about Robin Hood be a frame?

Arguments For:

Some have even argued that Robin Hood did exist, but more as a mythological creature; that the stories about him are a symbolic meaning. For instance, some have said that the traditional colour of Robin Hood’s outfit is Lincoln green; and that it represents the traditional colour of fairies. Or the colour green may also have a link with spring, which is featured prominently in the ballads, so this connects Robin Hood with life and growth.

One of the strongest arguments for was that Robin Hood was a real historic figure.  The early ballads linked Robin Hood with identifiable real places such as Sherwood Forest in Nottinghamshire. It also can be argued that Robin Hood was just a medieval trickster such as Puck and Teutonic elf Hodekin; both of these are supernatural characters so Robin Hood should also be seen as one too.

 Arguments Against:

However, as well as there is a lot of evidence to prove that Robin Hood did exist; there is also as much evidence to prove that the Robin Hood myth is just fiction. The earliest records of this character are found in traditional ballads (narratives set to music). These ballads could have not been taken as historical evidence for Robin Hood’s existence; and were probably not written at the time Robin Hood was first alluded to.

Another claim is that Robin Hood wasn’t from Nottingham, but from York. So for instance, instead of him to be said to live in Sherwood Forest. Robin Hood is to have had his base in Barnsdale Forest. This claim was had to be found in the earliest ballads in the 15th Century. Additionally, these ballads mentions a church, thought to be St Mary Magdalene; in South Yorkshire.  This is where Robin Hood had been said to had married Maid Marian. Moreover, only one ballad mentions Nottingham and only a few early ballads mention Robin Hoods arch nemesis, the Sherriff of Nottingham. But everyone just assumes that the Sherriff of Nottingham did exist however there isn’t enough evidence to prove this is right.

Conclusion:

Overall I think that Robin Hood existed but not the ‘Robin Hood’ everyone thinks it was. I think that he was not a real human just a figure that we should all learn from.  My research has helped me find out that there isn’t a lot of evidence to prove that Robin Hood did exist; most of the evidence I’ve gathered mentions totally different things.  So in my opinion, Robin Hood is like an allegory because everyone describes him as a type of heroic figure but really the story is like a moral so teaches us something important in life. But I could be wrong, we’ll never know the truth.

 

 

Who is the Creator of the Universe?

Introduction

This question has been asked many times, but no one knows the real answer. Who is the creator of the universe? There is a lot of evidence of God creating the universe, which would make it easy to believe but there is also a lot of evidence of other things like the Big Bang. Carry on listening to find out more information.

Arguments For

The world has a beginning, therefore it must have a cause, but who or what was that cause? Everything was made so perfectly and in place, we could have been put on a planet where it was too hot or cold to live on, but we were put on the right planet. If the Big Bang did happen how did everything just appear? Many people believe that cause was God. If God created the universe, who created God? The thing is, if God is known as the creator, he must be the creator of time as well. Therefore God must be the beginning of time and the creator of the world so nobody needed to create God because he was the first, the uncreated creator of the universe.

Argument Against

How do we have proof that God was the creator of the world? The Bible gives us proof, but Christians wrote the Bible so we can’t one hundr0ed percent believe it. There is scientific evidence of the Big Bang.  Red shift – this the evidence of all the other galaxies moving away from us. Two, the universe is gradually expanding and the start of the universe was from an explosion and the universe started to get bigger and bigger. Is this enough evidence?

Arguments For

How do we know that there was and explosion, no human soul was around at the time of the beginning of the world so do we have real proof? The world is said to be growing bigger, in pictures of the universe do we see a little difference? Yes, it expands only a little bit  but we should be seeing a difference , should we not? Coming back to when I said no soul was around at the beginning of the earth, in the bible it says that Adam and Eve were the only people to experience the beginning, if Adam and Eve were real.  If the Big Bang was real, wouldn’t it need a cause, since everything needs a cause.  So what caused the Big Bang?

Conclusion

I feel there is more evidence to prove God created the universe, this is why I believe that God is the creator of the world. There is written evidence that proves God’s existence and he created the Universe. The Big Bang theory is very easily believed, but I think it is less likely that that would happen in such a way where everything is just right and we can live where we were put. Myth investigation complete.

Atlantis- a real place or just a hoax?

Introduction:

Atlantis. We’ve all heard of it but is it real? Atlantis was originally supposed to be an island that was trying to take over the world and somehow sank. Recently scientists think they may have found it in Cadiz, Spain. As I research all the facts, I will try to find out the truth…

 

Arguments for:

The city has supposedly been found by a group of scientists just of the coast of Spain. It is said that a tsunami swept the city off of the land and has now been found by a submerged satellite photo near Cadiz. Buried under some mudflats, the scientists claim to have pinpointed its exact location. Richard Freund who led the team of scientists said that it was the power of tsunamis that took Atlantis off of the coast, 60 miles inland. They found a satellite photo of a city underwater and then surveyed the city. Freund also said that they had found something that no-one had ever seen before,  which he says gives them a layer of credibility.  A man named Plato describes Atlantis larger than Libya and Asia Minor combined, located just off the Pillars of Hercules.

 

Arguments against:

A few historical scholars concede that there is any factual evidence about Atlantis  and usually agree that Plato has only slightly recalled a Bronze cataclysm in the Aegean Sea but his account is largely fictional. According to www.atlantisevidence.com Plato’s theory was also a bit suspicious, especially that he knew the exact measurement of the capital. Most people think it is some kind of allegory or a story.

 

Conclusion:
All-in-all it seems as though Atlantis could be highly real but a bit suspicious at the same time. Personally I think it may be real, judging on the fact that scientists have found it and it doesn’t sound impossible. I think that Atlantis is down there. Somewhere…

Is Bigfoot real ?

Introduction

For many years people have gone out searching for Bigfoot, every time people go they always say they saw him but it this true?

Arguments for

Bigfoot is real because he has left behind markings such as footprints, debris, food, fur and as well photographic evidence which means he is real. Bigfoot’s kind has its own DNA, so a hunter killed a supposed Bigfoot took the animal for a DNA test and then got the results back saying the DNA strands say 100% Bigfoot DNA. Biggest Bigfoot sightings are from America with over a million people saying they’ve either got a  photo or killed Bigfoot.

Arguments against

Bigfoot isn’t real because his footprints aren’t actually big so it could be an ape, the debris is only ripped out plants and trees which a human could’ve done. The photos of   Bigfoot are fake because Bigfoot looks  the exact same as an ape. Bigfoot’s DNA is shared with the ape so it is most likely that it is fake. Also all over the world people have said they have seen Bigfoot when there is only actually one Bigfoot in the world. Bigfoot’s fur is actually normal ape hair along with teeth, eyes and limbs.

Conclusion

Bigfoot isn’t real because the against side proves to have more arguments about why he isn’t real than the for side saying that he isn’t real. Bigfoot isn’t real because all this evidence hasn’t been backed up enough to tell if it is real.

Moonlanding Myth (real or fake)

Intro

In year 7 we have spent some time looking at myths and my myth is the moon landing.The Moonlanding is a massive moment in human history or as Neil Armstrong put it   ‘one small step for man, one giant leap for man kind’.  But did it actually happen? I am going to look through the arguments and evidence and see whether apollo 12 is real or fake.

Arguments against:

If you look at many of the photographs that the astronauts took of space the thing that you would notice is why are there no stars in the images. This has sparked many conspiracy theories about why it is fake.

Then there is the U S A  flag .Many conspiracy theorists have studied the footage and have spotted that the flag moves as if it has been blown by wind but there is no wind on the moon so this must mean that they are actually on earth.

Enkivillage.com shows 8 reasons why the moonlandings were fake. It says that there are different shadows point in different directions. How could there be more than one light source?

Arguments for:

If you go back to the missing stars, NVIDIA  ( they are the people who created the special space cameras)have come out and said that the light off the sun reflected of the moon meant that it was made impossible for the cameras to see the stars. They have also said that the Flag moved because of the force that Neil Armstrong was using to put it into the ground.

Also Nasa has spent billions and billions of Dollars on equipment and simulation devices which you can go and see if you go there. Do you think that they would have spent that amount money on all of that if it was a hoax.

Conclusion :

The points both sides put forward great arguments but I believe that the arguments for the Moonlanding are a lot more convincing. Of course there are many other points and we have only really scratched the surface but we have looked at some of the biggest points. Also there were so many employees for the moon landings that if it was all a hoax then surely one of the millions of people working on this project would have surely let something slip?


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar

Does the Loch Ness Monster Exsist

Introduction

There is a legend about a monster at Loch Ness in Scotland. Have you ever heard of it? It is called the Loch Ness Monster, or for short, Nessie. There have been lots of sightings of Nessie but not all of them are true. Loch Ness is the largest body of fresh water in Britain.

Sightings-For

There are lots of sighting of Nessie. One of the sightings was apparently done on the 24th of May, 1990. The website told us that  a member of the Northern Naturalists organisations, Mr Peter O’Conner when he was walking on the shore beside Foyers Bay. At this sighting the monster glided into view near the headland. Mr Peter O’Conner slipped into the water so that he  could get a closer look. The monster was smooth just like a seal. It was small and sheep-like and it  had a very, very long and strong neck. He turned to take a photograph but as soon as Peter took his camera out the monster swam to his right so in his picture there is a realistic version of Nessie. Even though it is black and white and also fuzzy, the is a outline of a monster.

Scans-Against

Even though there has been lots of sightings of the Loch Ness monster, the BBC clames to have proven that Nessie does not exist. Through separate sonar beams and technology they made sure that none of the loch had not been scanned.  There was no monster! They claimed that none of the sightings were true and they all could have been a plesiosaur. A plesiosaur is a old reptile which is claimed to have died out with the dinosaurs. The BBC recon that the plesiosaur could have survived by a thread in the cold waters of Loch Ness. So this proves that the Loch Ness monster does not exist.

Conclusion

I don’t think that Nessie exists because I think that technology can prove this better than stories and roomers. The sightings could have been of the plesiosaur not the Loch Ness monster. I think that the pleniosaur is the Loch Ness monster that the people were talking about.


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
« Older posts Newer posts »