Thursday, January 25, 2007
WTF is wrong with some NUS students!?!?
omg. i cant believe some nus students. what's wrong with them siah!!! its just an ecology trip and someone gets so worked up! WTH?! below are the chain of emails. read on.. debating on the hypothesis.
MAIL 1
However,i think the hypothesis would be :
Due to human disturbances, the growth of mosses is denser at the edges of the wooden stairs (Zone A and D) compared to the central zones. (Zone B and C)
Do everyone agree? cos i rememmber when we were over at Labrador, we wrote down our hypothesis as "the growth of mosses is denser at the edges of the wooden stairs (Zone A and D) compared to the central zones. (Zone B and C)"
I think we are looking more to human disturbances as a variable, so therefore we should include the statement of "human disturbances" into the hypothesis.
Peeps, agree? =)
Vanessa
MAIL 2
Hi to all,
apparently there is some debate on the hypothesis going on. Is it possible for all of the people to take a look at the forum of our group and give suggestion?
Its best that we can confirm on the hypothesis and some provide some direction in the display and interpretation of the results ASAP so we can get on with report writing. Thank you.
Regards,
Jonathan
MAIL 3 (by yours truely)
hey guys,
guess we would need a conclusion as to the stuff as suggested by jason and vanessa.
1) for the results <0.5%, lets all change it to "insignificant"
2) the hypothesis. to include the human disturbances or not. there are 2 ways about it.
(i) if lets say we dun include the human disturbances, we would thus accept the hypothesis that growth is more at the edges due to closeness to the vegetation. however, we can still add the variable of human disturbances inside while explaining.
(ii) if lets say we do include the human disturbances in the hypothesis, it is possible too. in this case, we have to take into account that due to the fact that ppl step on the steps that are nearer the central i.e B and C of the steps, these mosses have been removed. thus, our hypothesis would be proven right too, but it could be due to 2 reasons, which was B and C being further away from the vegetation and also due to the human disturbances that B and C has lesser moss growth.
I guess for ourselves it would be better to take number (ii) for the hypothesis. Our hypothesis must show that we have already taken into account that human disturbances play a major role in our hypothesis. (to show we were thinking). we can thus conclude by saying that the difference in the percentages was more becoz of human disturbances than other ecological factors.
What's you guys' stand on this? I'm fine with both of them, just that we need to come to a consensus quick so that report can be done up soon!
Cheers,
Daniel
MAIL 4 "the useless comments by this NUS person"
Since this is an individual report I don't really think it is necessary for all of us to agree on one specific hypothesis and write all our reports based on that.
Those who agree that the first is better, will present their data based on that and those who agree that the second is a better hypothesis can simply change and present their data based on the 2nd one.
Why is it neccessary that we all have the same hypothesis? Can't we present the data according to whichever one we agree mostly with?
MAIL 5 the WTF reply.
erm. alrite. need not get so worked up though? have a great weekend guys.
Daniel
wah lau. just a hypothesis. relax babe!
4:00 PM
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
d@n is back!
yup i'm finally back from my summer exchange from aussie. haven got the time (and money) to blog in sydney since the internet there's not free and we've been really rushing here and there to visit more places of interests. i miss the times there already. weather's there is great! summer at 18 degrees or so, not forgetting the sun! you won't sweat playing at the beach. how shiok is that!
the sun, the sand, the cool weather, the people, the experience, the beach, body boarding, surfing, blue mountains, jenolan caves, sydney fish market, indo mee and "soup soup" suppers, the nicknames i've given to people, the friends i've made.
can i go again?
8:35 PM
