On Friday March 20th, much of Europe went outside in the early morning expecting to see the first total solar eclipse over the continent since 1999. However many onlookers were disappointed as clouds covered the sun and the moon throughout many parts of Europe. People in Berlin, one of the few places where the eclipse was visible, claimed that it was not like the one in 1999, when everything went dark for two minutes. This total solar eclipse, when the moon is directly between the sun and the earth, was part of three special celestial events on Friday, as it was also the first day of spring, and a supermoon, when the moon is closest to the earth and appears bigger. Scientists in Svalbard, remote Norwegian islands where the eclipse was fully visible, hosted a live stream for people to witness the moon fully covering the sun. People will hope that the next total solar eclipse over Europe in the year 2026 will live up to expectations.
As stated previously, a solar eclipse is a rarity that is not often seen. Many times when a solar eclipse does occur, it is only visible from the middle of an ocean or a remote place in the world where few are able to see it. This is why a total solar eclipse passing over most of western Europe was so hyped up. The unpredictable nature of the weather made the eclipse unviewable to some, but it is still significant that it was visible to such a large population of people.
This article does a good job of explaining the situation across Europe on Friday, but I wish they would have gone into more detail in explaining solar eclipses, other than saying what they are. More details about how and when this event happens would have been helpful. It also would have been helpful to know when a total solar eclipse will occur in North America and when was the last one was visible in the US.
Bilefsky, Dan, and Melissa Eddy. "Europeans (Carefully) Gaze Upward for Glimpse of the Solar Eclipse." The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Mar. 2015. Web. 21 Mar. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/21/science/space/solar-eclipse-europe.html?ref=science>.
This article on the European solar eclipse by Borja contained a few aspects that were well presented. The first was the thoughtful summary paragraph. The paragraph was not too long, but it still kept enough key events within the story to keep it interesting and on topic. The second thing the author did well was proving his facts with evidence. Every point that was made had evidence from the text to back it up, which made his report seem a lot stronger. The third thing Borja did really well was his relevance paragraph. Most reports have a very weak or difficult to relate too paragraph in this section, however the good choice in topic allowed there to be a good connection between the article and the general population. These 3 things mainly helped strengthen the report.
ReplyDeleteWithin this review, I found 2 things quite interesting. The first was that the scientists in Svalbard were able to livestream the entire thing for those who missed it. This would have probably not been possible in 1999, when the last total eclipse occurred. The second thing that I found interesting was that so many parts of the continent of europe were able to see something to amazing, such as the triple event, about every 1 or 2 decades. We rarely hear about these events in America, mostly because if this happened few people would bother to look. It is so cool that so many people can connect with each other and spend a little time looking at the sky together for something amazing.
This review could have been better if the author went into more depth and did some background research on solar eclipses. The author should have included the definition and description of a solar eclipse in his own review, and done some background research on solar eclipses so that their readers will better understand the event, rather than just giving up because the article forgot to mention it. Overall, this article was well written.
I commented on Borja’s review of the article, “Europeans (Carefully) Gaze Upward for Glimpse of the Solar Eclipse”. I thought that overall Borja did a great job reviewing this article. One thing Borja did really well was talk about the previous and future solar eclipses and compared them to the most recent one. This allowed me to learned that not all solar eclipses are exactly alike, although they have similar characteristics. For example, the solar eclipse in 1999, made everything go dark for 2 minutes. This solar eclipse was much less intense compared to that. Another thing I liked that Borja did was talk about what the article did both well and what they could have improved. This makes Borja appear unbiased and makes his opinion appear more valid. A third thing I liked about Borja’s review was how he was to talk about the negatives as well as the positives about this eclipse. One of the positives was that thousands of people were about to see this eclipse. One of the negatives was that the weather was cloudy and foggy, which made the eclipse less visible for people. It is interesting to learn that so many people got to see this eclipse, but didn’t get to see the eclipse to its full effect.
ReplyDeleteI learned a lot about solar eclipses from reading Borja’s review and his article. One thing I learned was just how large the effect of a solar eclipse can be. A solar eclipse can cause everything to appear completely dark for several minutes. Solar eclipses can also cause power failures and can seriously damage eyes. Another thing I learned was just how rare these total solar eclipses are. The last total solar eclipse in Europe occurred in 1999 and the next is not to occur in 2026. Between these times there will be partial eclipses, but there will not be a total eclipse until 2026. This made me realize just how rare and how spectacular solar eclipses are.
Although overall this review was very well written, there is still room for improvement. One thing I think Borja should have done is started off his summary with a definition of solar eclipse. Without this definition, this review has no meaning to someone who does not know what a solar eclipse is. This definition makes the article make more sense and have more meaning. In conclusion, I think that overall Borja did a great job reviewing this article, but could have improved a few things.
Borja's review of the article "Europeans (Carefully) Gaze Upward for Glimpse of the Solar Eclipse" written in The New York Times, was about the solar eclipse that took over the sky in much of Europe on Friday March 20th. There were many features that were well presented in Borja's review. First, Borja did a very good job explaining what a solar eclipse is and how the eclipse on Friday, March 20th was very different. Secondly, Borja did a good job summarizing the article clearly. Thirdly, I learned that each solar eclipse has unique characteristics and each solar eclipse is different from another. I am impressed with the popularity and attention the recent solar eclipse received. Scientists in Svalbard, Norwegian Islands, where the eclipse was fully visible, set up a live stream for all people to witness. It was a surprise to me to find out Solar Eclipses are usually only visible in the middle of the ocean or a isolated place in the world where only a few are able to see it. Another characteristic of a Solar eclipse that is interesting is that it can cause everything to appear completely black for several minutes before the light comes back. Overall, Borja wrote a well written and descriptive review about his article. One thing Borja could have improved on is incorporating his opinion on this article and starting with a short summary of the article to clarify and let the reader know the main idea of the article.
ReplyDeleteBorja wrote a fact dense review of the article " Europeans (Carefully) Gaze Upward for Glimpse of the Solar Eclipse" from the New York Times, explaining the solar eclipse visible to some Europeans on Friday, March 20. Borja did a good job of summarizing important and interesting points from the article, for example when he explained how Scientists in Svalbard hosted a live stream for people to witness the solar eclipse since they couldn't experience it first hand because it was blocked by clouds where they were. He also did a good job of explaining areas where the article is lacking. I liked How Borja explained why some were not impressed by the eclipse and how this one was different form one in 1999; I also liked how he explained why a Solar Eclipse is rare and how often people can only see them in remote, unpopulated area's or in the middle of the ocean where there are few people to witness it. I also liked when he explained why so many people were excited for this one, making it even more disappointing when it was not viewable. Overall I think Borja did a good job of reviewing this article, I just think it would have been more impactful if he had explained the relevancy of the article to society.
ReplyDelete