Are you information literate?

How to have fun with history is available

on http://booklocker.com/books/4809.html

If you wake up to discover that the Internet and all cell phone towers are down, could you:

• Get directions by reading a physical map
• Identify north, south, east, west visually
• Do basic arithmetic, i.e. add, subtract, multiply and divide, in your head or on paper without the help of an electronic crutch
• Source the information you use and need on a daily basis manually
• And, if the downtime for the Internet and your cell was due to some disaster, could you source basic survival information manually?

If you said no to one of the above, you should be on alert. If you could not answer two or more of the above, you are not information literate, regardless of education or profession.

Information literacy is the ability to access, extract and comprehend information effectively and efficiently. If your only skill for accessing information is to google an answer, then the rest of the pyramid collapses.

Information literacy exists within the individual not within his or her ability to manipulate and bundle key terms on the Internet.

Alternative sources include individuals such as specialists, organizations, knowledge repositories such as libraries, and physical sources such as books, maps or documents. Two important factors in accessing information is to know what is available to you, and where. The process of discovering these can be fun and the journey packed with happy surprises.

The ability to memorize or retain information is also key to information literacy. This process is called building general knowledge. General knowledge is a personal database of useful - and sometimes trivial - information which can be relied upon when technology fails to deliver the answers - or when party talk flags.

Heather Vallance is the author of How to have fun with history which explores the principles of information literacy in the context of historical research. She is also the coauthor of How to be information literate which is a textbook for tertiary level education, particularly for students with English second language skills.

Research on Fukushima worth sharing

As I write, there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of children who have been robbed of their innocence and right to a full, healthy life. Neither they nor their parents have committed a crime, yet they are punished for simply being alive in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This is the raw truth, the stripped down reality of Fukushima.

We owe it to these children to inform ourselves to the best of our ability so that if our paths ever cross with theirs we are, at least, able to offer the compassion they, and those who love them, will need to face their futures.

Global Research is a Montreal based independent research and media organization which provides simple, scientific and informative material on many important issues affecting us today. GR has released an ebook, a compilation of data on Fukushima and its impact, not just on the Japanese, but on the world as a whole, wherever the trade winds blow and the oceans flow.

The ebook is called Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation.

I strongly suggest that this be read and kept as reference.

The authors invite sharing.

The statistical myth that is Fukushima

After a little more look-see I discovered a video in which Arnie Gundersen refers to a model used to project the one million deaths from Fukushima.

Although I have a great respect for Mr. Gundersen, I do have a problem with the source he quotes.

Models are projections, nothing more, nothing less. They are the what if factor often present in the absence of raw primary data. They anticipate possible statistical outcomes only and should never be viewed as substitutes for actual research data. 

My personal feeling is that if we really wanted to understand the human toll from Fukushima, qualitative scientists like anthropologists should be hired to perform a long term observational study in the areas mapped by European tracking systems which followed the spread of radiation during March/April onwards.

I can guarantee that their outcomes would be horrendously higher than a million because of the cumulative nature of observational research, and there is nothing more cumulative than radiation - especially when it is still seeping, and will continue to seep into our seas, our air, and onto our land and food sources for an unknown period, perhaps decades.

*

The feeling among quantitive scientists is that we will never know if diseases are caused by Fukushima radiation or some other factor. Observationally, I would argue that we can by studying the society itself.