2
NEWS
apachepowwow.tumblr.com
Venus: The Final Frontier?
By ANDREW WANG
Staff Writer
With the discovery of water on Mars, it only seems to be a matter of time before the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) moves on to other planets. Within the next decade, NASA has decided to launch missions to Venus and several other asteroids. Out of 27 proposals submitted, two of the proposals to Venus and three of the proposals to travel to asteroids were selected. Although these types of Discovery-class missions are selected every year, these have been the only ones chosen since 2010. Since these missions will take huge amounts of time and be costly, NASA may decide to launch two missions instead of one. All of the finalist missions are robotic. Of the two proposals involving Venus, which has not been visited by a U.S. spacecraft in more than 20 years, the first plan wants to use a radar orbiter to map the surface of the heavily clouded planet. The mis-
sion titled VERITAS, would create high quality maps of Venus which would be far better than the ones astronomers have now. The other proposal suggests dropping a probe through Venus’ atmosphere while taking measurements on its descent. The three proposed asteroid missions have very different targets and goals. One suggests targeting an asteroid called Psyche, a metal asteroid. Another proposes a visit to four asteroids that orbit near Jupiter. Little is known about these asteroids, which could be much further distance in the solar system than expected. The last proposal suggests making a special infrared telescope that would detect nearby asteroid threats to Earth, helping NASA identify and prepare against asteroids. Whichever option NASA chooses will definitely be beneficial to astronomy and would certainly lead us closer to manned missions to other planets. The time for space exploration is now for awe-inspiring breakthroughs. awang@apachepowwow.com Photo by GOSPELHERALD.COM
October 2015
Auto Know This Scandal By KIMBERLY LO Staff Writer
Volkswagen’s goal for itself in the car industry was to get to the top of the global competition. However, to accomplish this, it resorted to tricking emissions tests through defeat devices. In late September of this year, Volkswagen admitted to having put software in their cars that were used to cheat the emissions tests. This software was installed in 11 million cars; an estimated half a million of the cars were sold to customers in the U.S. Previously, testing in labs was used to determine how a vehicle performed, and it was not strange that there was a difference between testing the cars in labs and driving them on the road. However, the issue brought up was the discrepancies between the lab and road emissions of diesel. When the nonprofit International Council on Clean Transportation came up with the idea of testing cars on the road, the group collaborated with the state of California to run tests. It was expected that American cars would have much less polution than European cars because of America’s stricter standards. However, when testing Volkswagens against BMWs, it became clear that this was not the case. People were confused because the cars functioned perfectly when they were
placed on a dynamometer. Yet on the road, the Volkswagens clearly had many troubling issues. When Volkswagen was first questioned about this strange occurance, it claimed that there were many possible reasons for such results. Regulators finally discovered the missing link while testing in the lab. By changing the parameters to make the car function like it was moving on the road, the car began performing in the lab just as it had been performing on the road. It turns out that Volkswagen had been installing defeat devices since the 2009 models. On Sept. 3, Volkswagen finally conceded to having used the devices to alter the emissions tests results. Volkswagen is not planning on selling diesel vehicles in the U.S. as chief executive Michael Horn has apologized for Volkswagen’s actions in his speech to Congress on Oct. 8. klo@apachepowwow.com Graphic courtesy of WALLFEST.COM Photo courtesy of VW.COM
Race To The Presidency: Democratic Debate By ANDREW LIM, ANDREW MULIADI, & ANDREW WANG Staff Writers
On Tuesday Oct. 13, at the Wynn Resort in Las Vegas, five democratic presidential candidates debated head-to-head on both national and international matters. Amongst the five candidates were former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, former Virginia Senator Jim Webb, and former Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee. All with considerable experience in politics, the candidates shared their opinions and views while hoping to persuade the citizens of America for their vote. Of all the topics discussed on Tuesday night, the one that sparked the most media attention, next to Clinton’s emails, was the issue of race. Although it was quickly swept off with simple replies, the issue of race is still a highly important and controversial topic. The candidates were asked blatantly, “Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?” Immediately, almost all the candidates responded by supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. Webb was the only one to say that “white culture” and discrimination of white people were not acceptable, leading to his support of the statement that “all lives matter.” Former CIA computer employee, Edward Snowden, and the controversy over his information leaking was also brought into de-
bate that night. The candidates were thrown an unexpected surprise when they were asked if Snowden should be regarded as a traitor or an American hero for releasing information on the National Security Agency’s mass domestic surveillance program. Again, almost all the candidates took the stance of naming Snowden as a traitor to America and the people. Only Chafee believed that the “American government was acting illegally” and that Snowden should not be charged for his “whistle blowing.” However, these responses all seemed a little hesitant since each candidate knew they would be judged on their responses to this sensitive topic. Another big issue that struck the floor was the legalization of marijuana. Only Clinton and Sanders took a stand to confer the topic. Correspondent Juan Carlos Lopez directed the question at Sanders first: “Senator Sanders, right here in Nevada, there will be a measure to legalize recreational marijuana on the 2016 ballot. If you were a Nevada resident, how would you vote?” In a candid manner, Sanders said that he would vote yes. According to him, too many lives have been devastated
due to “non-violent offenses.” Likewise, Clinton approved of the use of medical marijuana, although she mentioned that “we need to do a lot more research so that we know exactly how we’re going to help people for whom medical marijuana provides relief.” Clinton asserted that “we have got to stop imprisoning people who use marijuana. Therefore, we need more states, cities, and the federal government to begin to address this.” This change would result in the reduction of the prison populace due to the absence of nonviolent offenders Sanders took the spotlight during the de- bate
when he mentioned the controversy and issue of income inequality among Americans. He firmly stated that “it is wrong, today, in a rigged economy, that 57% of all new income is going to the top 1%.” Other candidates followed up with exactly how much America’s wealth is controlled by the richest Americans. Sanders explained “that it is immoral and wrong that the top one-tenth of 1% in this country own almost 90%—almost—own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%.” Similarly to the issue of income inequality, the Democratic candidates touched upon the topic of college affordability. Universally, all candidates agreed the price of admission and simply the price of college is too high. Both Clinton and Sanders highly criticized the incredibly high costs of affording college and called for broader reformations and changes to the system. O’Malley joined in on the issue, declaring the necessity to “make college a debt-free option for all families instead of saddling our kids with lifetime crushing debt.” At the end of the debate, all the candidates gave closing remarks in which they repeated their introductions, asserted their firmest positions, and added more information regarding their campaign. alim@apachepowwow.com, amuliadiapachepowwow.com, awang@apachepowwow. Graphics courtesy of RAREFLAG.COM and WALLPAPERSUP.COM