The Mystery of Loch Ness By Kayden Mitchell

Of all the mysteries in the world, none has been as popular as that of the Loch Ness Monster. Perhaps the biggest mystery is whether it is convincing evidence or a simple desire to believe that keeps the myth alive.

Loch Ness is a lake in Scotland. The loch, or lake, is known for sightings of a mysterious monster. Most who see this monster, known as Nessie, describe something with a long neck and several humps above the water. Sometimes the "monster" is moving in these sightings, and sometimes it is still. Many have suggested that Nessie might be a plesiosaur (plea-see-a-soar), an aquatic dinosaur that was trapped in the loch after the last ice age.

The plesiosaur theory presents several problems. First, the plesiosaur is an air breather. Such a creature would need to surface often and, therefore, be seen more frequently. Second, it's unlikely that the same creature has lived in the loch since the last ice age. Today's creature would have to be the offspring of an original plesiosaur trapped long ago. This would suggest multiple creatures in the loch (needed to produce offspring). Again, sightings would be more frequent if this were the case.

So from a purely logical stand point, the existence of such a large and ancient creature is unlikely. But assume for a minute that it is possible. What would a plesiosaur need to live in an enclosed lake?

Tropical waters: Scientists believe plesiosaurs were warm-blooded. Like crocodiles and alligators, plesiosaurs would need to live in warm waters. The loch is very cold with temperatures averaging about 40 degrees Fahrenheit (4.4 Celsius).
Food: Like other warm-blooded creatures, plesiosaurs would need a large quantity of food. If there is a group of Nessies, then even more food would be needed. Because the loch is full of silt (underwater dust) not much light gets into the deepest areas. So the food chain, which would depend on plankton, is very weak at its base. As a result, there is probably not enough food to support such a large creature.
However, the plesiosaur theory is not the only one. Many other ideas attempt to explain the sightings and "photographs." But two separate sonar surveys of the loch have not found any evidence of a creature larger than a salmon. The last survey1, completed in 2007 by the British Broadcasting Company (BBC), involved 600 different sonar beams. Using satellite navigation systems, the team made sure every inch of the loch was searched. The team found nothing.

With cell phones and digital cameras, one would think that sightings of Nessie would increase. This has not happened. The BBC team believes the legend of Nessie has endured because people see what they want to see. To prove this, the team used a fence post, raising it before groups of tourists. Afterwards several of the tourists asked to draw pictures of what they had seen drew pictures of a monster's head.

Which describes the introduction to the essay?
It has two paragraphs: one for the thesis and one for background.
It has a wide focus: one that includes a variety of theories.
It states a contradiction: one that the conclusion corrects.
It states the main point: one that is not fully answered in the essay.

Jargon is a specialized vocabulary of a particular group trade or profession

Memories of a memory have you ever witnessed something amazing, shocking or surprising and found when describing the event that your story seems to change the more you tell it? have you ever experienced a time when you couldn't really describe something you saw in a way that others could understand? if so, you may understand why some experts think eyewitness testimony is unreliable as evidence in scientific inquiries and trials. new insights into human memory suggest human memories are really a mixture of many non-factual things. first, memory is vague. imagine your room at home or a classroom you see every day. most likely, you could describe the room very generally. you could name the color of the walls, the floors, the decorations. but the image you describe will never be as specific or detailed as if you were looking at the actual room. memory tends to save a blurry image of what we have seen rather than specific details. so when a witness tries to identify someone, her brain may recall that the person was tall, but not be able to say how tall when faced with several tall people. there are lots of different kinds of "tall." second, memory uses general knowledge to fill in gaps. our brains reconstruct events and scenes when we remember something. to do this, our brains use other memories and other stories when there are gaps. for example, one day at a library you go to quite frequently, you witness an argument between a library patron and one of the librarians. later, when telling a friend about the event, your brain may remember a familiar librarian behind the desk rather than the actual participant simply because it is recreating a familiar scene. in effect, your brain is combining memories to you tell the story. third, your memory changes over time. it also changes the more you retell the story. documented cases have shown eyewitnesses adding detail to testimony that could not have been known at the time of the event. research has also shown that the more a witness's account is told, the less accurate it is. you may have noticed this yourself. the next time you are retelling a story, notice what you add, or what your brain wants to add, to the account. you may also notice that you drop certain details from previous tellings of the story. with individual memories all jumbled up with each other, it is hard to believe we ever know anything to be true. did you really break your mother's favorite vase when you were three? was that really your father throwing rocks into the river with you when you were seven? the human brain may be quite remarkable indeed. when it comes to memory, however, we may want to start carrying video cameras if we want to record the true picture. part a and part b below contain one fill-in-the-blank to be used for all three question responses. your complete response must be in the format a, b, c including the letter choice, commas, and a space after the commas. part a: which of the following best explains why memories from childhood are unreliable? fill in blank 1 using a, b, or c. our brains add details and general knowledge to childhood memories. our brains are not as reliable as video cameras are. our brains create new stories to make the past more interesting. part b select one quotation from the text that supports your answer to part a. add your selection to blank 1 using e, f, or g. but the image you describe will never be as specific or detailed as if you were looking at the actual room. when a witness tries to identify someone, her brain may recall that the person was tall, but not be able to say how tall. to do this, our brains use other memories and other stories when there are gaps. select one quotation from the text that supports your answer to part a. add your selection to blank 1 using h, i, or j. documented cases have shown eyewitnesses adding detail to testimony that could not have been known at the time of the event. with individual memories all jumbled up with each other, it is hard to believe we ever know anything to be true. when it comes to memory, however, we may want to start carrying video cameras if we want to record the true picture answer for blank 1:

Read this excerpt from wheels of change by sue macy.that said, it's hard to grasp the full extent of the bicycle's impact on americans in the late 19th century—particularly female americans. imagine a population imprisoned by their very clothing; the stiff corsets, heavy skirts, and voluminous petticoats that made it difficult to take a deep breath, let alone exercise. add to that the laws and social conventions that cemented a man's place as head of the household and holder of the purse strings. how suffocated women must have felt. and how liberated they must have been as they pedaled their wheels toward new horizons.what is the central idea of the excerpt