Figure 1: Dumbo octopus. Dumbo octopuses have large fins that resemble the ears of famed cartoon elephant Dumbo. The fins protrude from the mantle just above the eyes and are used for motility. Photo by NOAA Ocean Exploration & Research available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanexplorergov/14142089822/in/photolist-... uunder CC BY-SA 2.0 license.
Figure 1. Tardigrade. Tardigrades are microscopic segmented animals. Photo by AJC1 available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajc1/37884036601/ under CC BY-SA 2.0 license.
I woke up at 6 in the morning. I brushed my teeth and changed into some warm clothes. I went to work making coffee for people for three hours. I got grab and go which consisted of a bacon egg and cheese english muffin and a yogurt. Then I went to class for an hour. After class I went back to work and made more coffee for another hour. I had lunch for half an hour with a friend. After lunch I walked to my writing class which lasts for two hours and twenty minutes.
Kurt LaFlamme, Smeralda Casimir
This website seems to be valid and reliable, but not for collegiate level research. It seems like a good website to learn a few things about ecology. The website offers dozens of languages, the publication is up to date, has the ability to share on social media platforms Facebook, Twitter, and Google, and the website has its own declaration of principles which includes a code of ethics along with mission and objectives. The resource links are alphabetized and are from around the world. There are also no advertisements on this website. The things that go against the reliability and validity of this website are that it does not have http://, the layout/web design seems immature and a little outdated, the links are old, and the last post on the website's social media account was nearly 4 years ago. Ultimately, it seems like an educational website that a middle or high school student would use for a research paper.
Partner: Cameron Bailey
https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/home
After exploring the site, Trends in Ecology and Evoulution, we have decided that the site itself is a reliable source. The papers on the site are well organized including many references from scholarly sources. You are also able to easily view where the information from each individual source is used in the article. This site is also active on social media and hold around 15,000 followers on twitter and 8,000 subscribers on Youtube. We then determined that this site was a research review site that included an editorial board that listed reviewers and authors along with their contact info and dates.
CATO Institute is a research institute. We believe that CATO provides some reliable information, seeing as they cite reliable sources. These references are included on the site. CATO is nonpartisan and is not government-funded. While their content isn't influenced by the government, it is possible that they publish information that favors their donors. Some things they've published in the past have indicated their tilt towards the right-wing, though a less significant portion of their content is liberal. Overall, their information is probably valid but their conclusions show that they are neither trustworthy nor reliable.
The reliability, validity, and trust of this website, https://www.sierraclub.org/home, is generally acceptable, but not for research purposes. The web address ending with ".org," indicates that it is a legitimate organization. Furthermore, there are 3.5 million members of the organization. However, it is politically charged. The organization first requests a donation upon visiting the website in order to "Fight Back," and "Protect America from Trump." Though the website is biased, it mainly focuses on the environmental status of the Earth and how to protect it. Still, the political language could suggest that certain pieces of information may be presented in a way that would alter our understanding of the science. It is confirmed in the terms and conditions that the money that is donated are not tax deductable, therefore all funds that are donated are directly used to benefit the "cause." On the surface, this is lobbying for advocacy. However, they do state that " The Sierra Club offers competitive salary package commensurate with skills and experience plus excellent benefits that include medical, dental, and vision coverage, and a retirement savings 401(k) plan." Thus, it is unclear where the donations go to supporting because the organization is supposedly "non-profit."
Google gains its credibility from being a well-known resource used by the vast majority of computer-users. The amount of information available on Google also contributes to its reliability; however, the reliability of Google can be questioned based on recent accusations against their bias for website order. The order of website results is affected by your location, history, etc. It's up to users to decide which websites available on Google are trustworthy or not. The fact that Wikipedia pops up on the side of the page when "ecology" is searched also lessens its credibility becasue Wikipedia is not considered a very trustworthy source. Google curates scientific literature in Google Scholar that is more credible and from established scientific journals.
Our link led us to an ecology article from Encyclopedia Britannica. At the top of the screen, it displays a 250th anniversary sign, which leads us to conclude that it is reliable, since it has been around for so long. We have also personally used the website in the past, which leads us to trust it more. Aesthetically, the website has a clean layout and is organized in an accessible way. It has multiple tabs for different resources (such as newsletters, quizzes, and biographies) and within those, a multitude of subjects (such as sports health and medicine, history, music, science, etc.) It also allows the reader to view the article contributors, who consist of university professors. This leads us to believe the source is valid due to the highly educated editors and scope of its information. The willingness to display the editors and read about them also lead us to trust the source more. Overall, we believe Encyclopedia Britannica is a highly valid, reliable, and trustworthy source.
Rosemary and Skylar
The article is not reliable, the article being on a fake animal. On the top of the page there is a link to conspirary theories and pictures of octupi in trees . The links it cite lead back to its own website, so there are no external links. Besides it being a fake website, the language personifies the octopus throughout the article. The author of the article also states personal opinions on whether or not the animal should be on the endangered species list. It has a lot of "facts" but it is written more like a news article rather than a scientific report.
Recent comments