Academic Writing

In the years during and following the Biosphere II project, it received criticism from scientists, the media, and project insiders alike. Many scientists outside the study said the results were predictable, that it was doomed to fail because such a small system could not support humans and diverse ecosystems at the same time. Scientists involved in the project had difficulty getting their results published, because reviewers criticized the lack of experimental replication in the study. The Biospherians themselves were divided into two camps over how to manage the dome, and whether they should allow oxygen to be added or not. Others have praised the study for demonstrating how incredibly our own Earth (Biosphere I) functions, and how difficult it would be to replicate with an artificially engineered system. The way the experiment failed—the imbalance in the carbon cycle—is also ironically similar to the condition humans are creating on Earth. Find an interesting article/video/podcast related to these topics to analyze and cite in your response to the following discussion prompts. Did Biosphere II qualify as a scientific experiment (based on the scientific method and practices we learned in Week 1)? Why so or why not? Or was it simply a demonstration, or a media stunt? Would you consider it a success that humans did remain inside for 2 years? Or was it failure because they had to receive oxygen? What was the most valuable result of the Biosphere II activities? Did it teach us anything useful Earth's biomes and ecosystems and/or how to address our impacts on Earth's biosphere? Instructions: 400-500 words a critical evaluation of the author and/or publisher of the cited material: What is the author’s background and/or expertise? What is the mission and vision of the organization and/or its underlying values? What is the purpose of the article? What biases do you think the author/publisher may have? skepticism: What did the writers neglect, misunderstand, misrepresent, or willfully ignore? Do you “buy” their argument? enthusiasm: what you think is valuable from the material and why cited references including author/publisher, year, title, and URL