Catalytic Converters and the EPA.

[Mustangbelle306]

Originally posted by Ponycar_302

No it isn't. The subject of a paper is revealed in the first sentence. Your subject and conclusion are two different topics.

That is your topic. You only covered one of your topic points in the body of the paper; the health effects. You failed to cover how it causes pollution WHEN COLD and how it ATTEMPTS TO WORK WHEN HOT.

That is your conclusion. At no point was the premis of becoming an active part of your future mentioned in the topic. Your paper is non sequitur; the conclusion does not follow the premises.

It was not a colloquial piece; it was a formal piece. For instance, you described what a cat was in simple terms so anyone could understand. In colloquial, or informal, writing you would have said it was a round thingy filled with some sort of chemicals and such.

I have a BS/MS PHD in Critical Thinking and Writing. For a highschool piece this is a good paper. Let us know what you get on it. I know what you originally intended with it. When I answered I was just expanding on the subject, as I am now. I never meant to offend you, Belle.

Oh, and nobody wears heels to work on a car. J/K

All of you observe: THIS is where I get defensive.

I said it was for a ******* newspaper. So, I'm supposed to write an editorial, send it to a newspaper, and call it a ******* round thingy? That's retarded, and I would NEVER refer to ANYTHING in that manner, even in email. That's vague and a waste of time...pretty shitty advice coming from an individual that has obviously gone to school in this area...

Do me a favor, from now on, come on out and insult me bluntly, instead of being cute by calling my work "high school" quality. This is a pretty elementary method of pissing me off, and I'm embarassed to say, it was quite effective.

I'm obviously enrolled in a university, since I referred to my instructor as a PROFESSOR. If you knew me at all, you would have understood that the REASON I referred to it as colloquial is because I am a college student that happens to be an outstanding writer, and this piece was in no way indicative of my usual work.

Furthermore, I was taught in both high school and college that it is extremely poor form to merely restate your thesis. The entire point of a paper is to reach conclusion, correct? Yes! So MY conclusion is that the public can be involved in the products that they are FORCED to purchase (emissions equipment on vehicles) and that EPA regulations on emissions are CRAP because its another round of problems. That was derived from my body paragraphs.

You ARE correct that I did not cover the hot/cold issue, and truthfully I did not realize that until now. I slapped it together, and I had started writing a paragraph explaining how the "supposed" pollution is almost all emitted when the car is cold, and minute amounts overall. I suppose I got lazy and forgot to insert it in the paper, and something that I should have caught during revision.

Ok, I'm done.