Rebekah's 17th Birthday =)

The cake:  

1 chocolate cake mix, 3 York peppermint patties, half a bag of chocolate chips, 2 cans of creamy icing, and 2 boxes of chocolate covered cherries.

Very chocolatey!

The bakers and the birthday girl:

Abigail, Rebekah, Bethany

Siblings, Cousins, Friends:

sMiLeS,

Apologia General Science, Module 7, The Fossil Record

►Videos and Resources for M7

Fossils, fossils, fossils!  There are many different kinds, and many of them do not contain actual matter from the original fossil!  Such is the case with cast fossils.

Casts and Molds
We used homemade playdough (directions) to make molds with the items the kids brought to class (use a little smear of vaseline to keep from sticking), then poured in plaster of Paris to make fossil casts.

The lego mold was a little warped, causing the fossil cast to be a little warped.  =)

The cast will always be the shape of the mold.  So if a clam gets buried by sediment, after the soft tissue decays and sediment settles and hardens around the clam shell, if the clam shell eventually weathers away and the mold is filled with more sediment, that is what kind of fossil cast a paleontologist might find one day.

(I do not like blank spaces!  So I am writing something to fill it in..... blah, blah, blah!)
LOL!




Petrifaction
We made a petrified log!  Kind of.  =)
Actually, a real petrified log comes from when mineral-laden water seeps through a log and hardens there, and as the log decays, the minerals stay, eventually totally replacing the log!  Minerals are what rocks are made of, so the result is a large, log-shaped rock!
If you were too scared to move, you might say you were turned to stone, or petrified!
We mixed Epsom salts with water and laid our paper towel "log" in the mixture and rolled it over so that all sides were wet. (directions)  We kept in in the sun for two weeks so that it would dry and harden from the minerals.  This is like a petrified log in that there are minerals in it, but unlike a petrified log in that the original materials (paper towel) remained.
Then we tried to burn it.
Petrified anything will not burn!
Just watch:

We also tried to get a Carbon Residue or Impression by placing a green leaf between two sheets of paper, and applying pressure.  I demonstrated in class by weighing a 2-gallon water cooler that we were going to place on the leaves.  It weighed 17 pounds!  Much more than the book required, so I figured we'd get a good result.  We placed the leaves between the sheets of paper, then placed those between two very flat boards and the water cooler on top.  We did not move it for 3 weeks, but still we only had a slight impression, and a very faint green color where the stem was.
Well, my niece and nephew had placed theirs under 2 large bags of concrete -- 160 pounds!  Theirs was the only good results.

Other kids only used a few books or other similar weight as called for, but there were no results.  Literally.
Their papers looked like... nothing.  =\
 I think I'll try this one again, and just leave it there a little longer.
(Similar directions to what we used - but they suggested a fall leaf.)

We also learned about Remains in Ice and Remains in Amber.
At the beginning of class, I showed the class a frozen chunk of ice in a bowl, and placed a rock on top of it and put it back in the freezer.  At the end of class, the rock had sank down in the ice a little and was frozen there.  This is one idea of how animals become entrapped in ice.  Um... idk if this is right, because large animals can take 5 days to totally freeze all the way through and their insides would be rotting by then.
If an animal were actually buried quickly by snow and ice, then it would freeze quickly, preserving much of its remains.

For the insects trapped in amber, I came across a neat idea of using orange jello with insects inside.
I just knew this would be a hit.  I heard ewwww! from several girls, even though I had washed the li'l buggies beforehand.  [innocent voice]  =D
The only insects I could find were bigger than I was expecting, so I used 2 packages of jello to cover the insects for 8 treats.  Some wanted to float up out of the jello, so I used forks on those, precariously perched, holding down antennae or legs, lol.  I did remove the forks before the jello got too firm.
I did see a few girls take a taste or two, but most was left uneaten.  lol.

This module was mostly about the fossil "record," so we did learn about fossils.
We also learned more about the uniformitarianists' view and the catastrophists' view of how the geography of the earth came to be the way it is.
But we also learned four very important features of the fossil "record."
1.  Fossils are usually found in sedimentary rock.  Sedimentary rock is washed and laid down by water.  (Does that tell you something about the Flood?)
2.  About 95% of the fossils found are clams and other hard-shelled creatures - not wooly mammoths or other large animals.
3.  Many of the fossils that are found are of plants and animals that are still alive today.  So... nothing changed from "billions" of years ago to today!  =)
4.  Different kinds of fossils can be found in two of the same kind of layers of stratified rock.  This shows that layers of the same kind of rock do not represent time periods of different fossils.

sMiLeS,

Awesome pics of the moon! =)

http://www.pixheaven.net/galerie_us.php?id=22

sMiLeS,

Apologia General Science, Module 6, Foundations of Geology

►Videos and Resources for this module

In this module, we learned two more new words!  Uniformitarianism and catastrophism. (!!!)
C'mon, they're no harder than all the words I learned in Biology last year!  
When thinking of the word uniformitarianism, think of uniform - same.  This is the belief that if something is happening slowly today, such as erosion, it has always happened that way.  Uniformitarianists believe that the earth's geography was formed over billions of years.
Catastrophism comes from catastrophe.  This is the belief that most of earth's geography was formed by a large-scale catastrophe -- the Flood.  There are always local floods, some volcanoes, even tsunamis that cause large-scale damage, but nothing like the Flood caused.

We studied how water and wind erosion can affect geography.  I came across this site that had 12 Weathering/Erosion Stations, and we did several of those.

Experiment 6.2, Separation of Sedimentation
We added dirt, gravel, sand, and water to a jar.  They were to shake it up several times during the evening and let it sit overnight.  They had brought their own quart jars.
You can see the fine dirt at the top, followed by the sand and dirt, then sand and gravel.  You can't really see the gravel, but it's there.  =)

I like this picture. ↓
One of my students brought this in and let me keep it from one class to the next so I could get a picture after the blue chalk had settled.
(Thanks, Grace!)
← This is actually a 2-liter that has not been "blown up"!!!
I was amazed!  =)



Experiment 6.3 was about Physical Weathering: The Power of Plants
This experiment did not work, not even after a retry.  Boo.  =(
Readers, if you got yours to work, please tell me what you did!  If you have pictures, I'd love to see them!

We did the experiment as directed, mixing the plaster of Paris, and dropping the lima beans in, and knowing it was okay if they sank a little.  We covered them with folded, moist paper towels and sat them in the sun, keeping the paper towels wet.
Well, the beans did sprout all right.  Right out of the plaster!  Just popped right up.  There was no cracking of the plaster at all.  My experiment, plus the experiments of 5 families (one per family instead of one per kid) were all fails.
← We DID have one to sprout up from the side of the plaster.  A student brought it back and I took a picture.  Very thankful I was, too, since my retry failed also.  (Thanks, Courtney!)


She said she thought that one had sunk way down in the plaster when they dropped it in.  I should have popped the plaster out of the bowl to look at the bottom, but didn't.  =\  But still, there was no splitting of the plaster.  bleh.
Sigh.  I had already tried to redo it, carefully pushing my beans way into the plaster with the seed sprout thingy pointing down.  →
No go.  Fail.  >: (  (very grumpy!)  I am not trying again.


Experiment 6.4, Chemical Weathering
For these experiments I needed limestone and steel wool.  And vinegar.  I only needed 2 pieces of steel wool and just kind of tore/broke it into thirds.  I was given some samples of limestone which JohnDavid (my son) broke apart with a hammer.  I needed it to be the size that could fit in a pint jar.  (Again, they brought their own jars - 2 each family)
← We put the limestone in and covered it with vinegar and immediately saw the bubbles.  Lime in the limestone reacts with the acid in vinegar to make carbon dioxide and other chemicals.  This was to sit overnight.
The limestone started to break down, and eventually we could see the sediment.

The steel wool was placed in a separate jar with vinegar only covering half of it. →
We used jars instead of bowls so that the kids could put on a lid (or saran wrap w/ rubber bands) for the transport home.  Once home, they were to uncover them.
The steel wool was to be turned over a few times during the evening, making sure both sides were immersed in the weakly acidic vinegar.  This only needed to be covered halfway because it needed oxygen in order to work. (No lid)  Steel wool  is made mostly of iron, which tends to rust.  Many rocks have iron in them, and can erode from rusting.  Ours didn't rust in one day, but by day two, we saw rust.
Both of these chemical weathering experiments were to simulate how the acid in rainwater can erode things and make them rust.  There isn't a lot of acid in rainwater, so we used vinegar to speed up the process in order to see the results in only a day or two.

We talked about stalactites and stalagmites that grow in caverns from groundwater dripping down through the ceiling of the cavern.
We discussed the Flood a little, and about the different kinds of rocks that are in the layers of the Grand Canyon.
Igneous rock (formed from magma, or lava), sedimentary rock (made from sediments of igneous rock that have weathered and eroded), and metamorphic rock (made from either igneous or sedimentary rock that is under extreme pressure and heat, but not enough heat to melt back to lava).

We went over the different types of unconformities.  An unconformity is a surface of erosion that separates one layer of rock from another, as in the layers of rock found in the Grand Canyon and many other places.
There are nonconformities, disconformities, angular unconformities, and so-called (by evolutionists) paraconformities.
We also learned about intrusions - when magma/lava "intrudes," shooting through several layers of strata.  It looks like it has been inserted there.  If it is perpendicular to the strata, crossing several layers, the intrusion is called a dike.  Sills are intrusions that run parallel to the strata.

sMiLeS,

Where Have YOU Been???

"I have been to a lot of places, but I've never been in Cahoots. Apparently you can't go alone. You have to be in Cahoots with someone.
I've also never been in Cognito, either. I hear no one recognizes you there.
I have, however, been in Sane. They don't have an airport; you have to be driven there. I have made several trips, thanks to my friends and family.
I would like to go to Conclusions, but you have to jump and I'm not much on physical activity."

sMiLeS,

Apologia General Science, Module 5, The History of Life: Archaeology, Geology, and Paleontology

►Videos and Resources for this module

This module was so interesting!  I had never before heard of dendrochronology.  (hee hee!)
[den-droh-kruh-nol-uh-jee] Listen here.  
In short, dendrochronology is the study of tree rings, particularly in architecture, compared to other known "master tree rings" to figure out how old buildings or other structures are.  The tree rings can be overlapped and linked back as far as native Indian canoes!

Read this story to get an idea of how dendrochron-
ology can work.  Very amateurish, I know, but
remember, I'd never heard of dendrochronology
before!  (If not printable, let me know)


After we read the story, we used this worksheet, and the kids figured out which samples from the worksheet could corresponded with the items in the story,  according to their order.  Remember to start with the living tree sample as current, and date back from there.




So we looked at "tree cookies" - I had enough for each kid to have one if they wanted it - and of course my girls and their cousin named theirs.
(The skeleton from last year was Oscar, a crawdad we found was dubbed Sparky, they named their eggs (my favorite!), and they even named their spud people!)

So the tree cookies were christened:
Chip, Woody, and Chuck.  LOL!




The newer girls haven't gotten into naming items in their science experiments as much as my girls do, and they're a little more shy, not being used to our "group" so to speak.  (consists mostly of cousins who have known each other all their lives)
Although they did teach one girl how to rename all the scientists in Module 1 on their scientists worksheet.  Her mother wasn't sure what I'd think!    I told her it was totally fine.
Anaximander was just Amander; Anaximenes was x-meanie (hee hee!), and Leucippus became Lucy, lol.
They said it helped them remember their names better, and i'm sure it did!


We also learned how archaeologists use three tests to confirm accuracy of historical documents.
There was an entire section for each of these! Much more information than what I mention here.
►The internal test checks to see whether or not the document in question has any contradictions within itself.  We also discussed some Biblical accounts that are assumed to be contradictory, and how they aren't contradictions.
►The external test compares the document with outside sources - other historical facts - and compares to archaeological facts (like the existence of a city, etc.)  The Bible passes this test very well!
►The bibliographic test is the most important.  The document must contain direct eye-witness accounts, or second-hand accounts.  So these were usually recorded shortly after the actual event, and that is a good thing!
Since there are virtually no original documents from any truly ancient work of history (there are always copies of copies), the bibliographic test also asks how may different copies exist that were made by different people.  The more people who give the same account, the better.  This shows that it would be unlikely that the original was modified.

Of course, the Bible passes this test with ease!  =)
Isaiah 40:8; Matthew 24:35

sMiLeS,

My Dad's 70th Birthday

There aren't 70 candles, bc we didn't have that many, but I know it was somewhere in the forties.  haha!  =)

sMiLeS,

Apologia General Science, Module 4, Science, Applied Science, and Technology

►Videos and resources for this module

This module was not quite as fun for the kids because there was MATH!!!  =)
We already knew about the simple machines - lever, inclined plane, etc, but mainly we were learning what the advantage was for using these machines.
This advantage can be measured, and is called a Mechanical Advantage, or MA.
Mechanical advantage makes a job easier.

If the slope of two inclined planes are different, the Mechanical Advantage for each slope will be different.
This is easy to imagine, for if a wheelchair ramp is longer and less steep, it is easier to push the chair up the ramp.  This has a greater MA than a ramp that is shorter and more steep.
But with each advantage comes a "pay."  The pay for having a less steep slope is that you have to push farther.  Now this may seem like a no-brainer, and if one ramp had a height of 1.5 feet, and was only 3 feet long, and another ramp with a height of 1.5 feet was 10 feet long, you'd definitely say you'd rather have a longer ramp.
But suppose a ramp was 1.5 feet high, and was 40 feet long.  More MA is not always desirable if the advantage is not great enough to make the job significantly easier, or if the job wasn't hard to begin with.

Mechanical Advantage is measurable in numbers.
The formula for finding the MA for an inclined plane is MA = (length of the slope) ÷ (height).
So for a ramp that is 1.5 feet height and 10 feet long, you find the MA by dividing 10 ÷ 1.5 = 6.666...
The MA is 6.666...
The shorter ramp of 3 foot in length has a much smaller mechanical advantage.  3 ÷ 1.5 = 2.  Two is a very small mechanical advantage!    
Since a wedge is 2 inclined planes placed back to back, it uses the same formula as an inclined plane.

We learned the formula for each of the six simple machines. the lever, the wheel and axle, the pulley, the inclined plane, the wedge, and the screw.

A screw is a type of inclined plane -- it is just wound around.  To illustrate this, the kids took a piece of paper shaped like a right triangle, and highlighted the slope.  They wound it around a pencil to show that a screw is an inclined plane.
It would be hard to measure the length of the slope on a screw though, so there are extra steps involved in finding the MA of a screw, involving finding the circumference of the screwdriver or device that is turning the screw, then dividing that by the pitch (distance between threads).

The formula for pulleys was the easiest.  To find the MA for pulleys.... simply count the pulleys!  =)
(Unless you use only 1 pulley -- if you use only one pulley, you have no MA because you are simply reversing the direction of your pull.)
The more pulleys, the greater MA.
This means that using 6 pulleys is 3 times easier than using 2 pulleys!
To simulate how more pulleys can make things easier, we used a broom, a mop handle, and some rope.  Each time the rope wrapped around a handle, that simulated a pulley.  The kids first pulled with the rope wrapped around once, then three times.
They said it was much easier with more "pulleys."


The formula for the lever was the most complicated because there are three classes of levers.

MA = (distance from fulcrum to effort) ÷ (distance from fulcrum to resistance/load)
We used the term "fe-fr" to help us remember the order.
If you look at this image of the three classes of levers, you will see it can take a bit of brain work to think how to apply this formula to each of these different levers.

In a first class lever where the fulcrum is in the middle, we learned that the more distance between the fulcrum and the effort (where we placed on book), the easier it was to lift the load (resistance).  We illustrated this by placing a book on each end of a board, and using my pencil sharpener for the fulcrum (lol).  As we increased the number of books on the load end, we also increased the distance from the fulcrum to the effort (one book).  We illustrated that even though there were more and more books on the load end, the effort of one book was able to lift them all because of the increasing mechanical advantage by lengthening the distance between the fulcrum and the effort.  In other words, a longer lever.  =)

I had nothing ready to illustrate a wheel and axle, but I wish I had!  Something like bar weights on one end of the bar would have worked great.
I needed to impress upon the kids that turning the axle to make the wheel turn takes greater effort, but once it gets going, the wheel can turn fast.
►If you are turning the axle, the speed of the wheel is magnified.  You didn't turn the axle that fast, but it is magnified so that the wheel is turning faster.
This is like a 3rd class lever since a 3rd class lever is like a catapult.  
►When turning the wheel to make the axle move, the effort is magnified.  You didn't put forth that much effort, but it is magnified.  The axle turns easily.
This is similar to the first- and second-class levers.

sMiLeS,

Apologia General Science, Module 3, How to Analyze and Interpret Experiments

►Videos and resources for this Module

This time we were learning about analyzing and interpreting the results of experiments.  We learned that in order to have the most accurate results, as many variables as possible must be eliminated.

With the first experiment, I had planned again to use teams of 2 since that seems to work really well.  Teams of 3 or more often mean that one is doing the experiment, and the other two are doing "Social" Studies, lol.  So with two kids only, there is no 3rd person to talk to.  =D
I learned that it is VERY IMPORTANT to check to see that you have ALL the supplies, even the most basic one that you keep in your home at all times.  I have been told that assuming will get you in trouble.
Well, I assumed.
We do experiments at my house, so I took it for granted I would have enough salt in my cabinet.  We barely had enough for one kid!  So Cousin A did it while the rest looked on...
and did Social Studies... of course.  =D

Experiment 3.1, A Floating Egg
The instructions said to see if an egg would float in a large glass of water, and of course it didn't.  Then she added 1 tsp. of salt at a time, and mixed.  After adding about 5 tsp. the egg did stand on its end, and after 7 tsp. it floated.  =)
We talked a little about density, and then talked more about variables.
In this experiment we eliminated as many variables as possible.  We used one glass and one egg.  Eggs do not vary greatly in size if from the same carton, but they could a little, I guess.
When removing the egg from the water each time to add more salt, we let as much water drip back in as possible to eliminate the water being reduced.
We also could have had 7 or 8 different glasses with increasing amounts of salt in each one, and different eggs, but again there could have been measurement error, or different sized eggs.  (Well, WE couldn't have used that many glasses -- I didn't have enough salt!)
These differences are so slight that they seem frivolous.  But it is important to always reduce or eliminate any variable that is not necessary for the experiment; the variables from which you learn nothing.
The salt was a variable, but it was intended to be part of the experiment.  It was the variable from which we wanted to learn something so it was necessary.

Next we did Exp. 3.2, Which Boat Will Move?
At the beginning of class, I had given all the kids a piece of gum, telling them we'd need a pinch or two later for an experiment.  I had some bins with books in them under my bed, so we used two of those, and JohnDavid poured in about an inch or so of water.  The kids cut out eight cardboard boats, then we added our "motors."
One "motor" was a balled-up piece of non-lotion kleenex, another was a pinch of gum, and the third was soap.  The experiment said use a piece of bar soap, but that didn't work for us.  Maybe because we use Dove soap?  But I knew dish detergent would work.  =)
We had four boats in each bin, so all the kids would not be crowded around one bin.  So what was our motor for the fourth boat?  Nothing.  This boat had nothing being done to it, so it was our control.  The control of an experiment is the variable or part of the experiment to which all others can be compared.
In other words, nothing was being done to this boat to cause it to do anything at all.  If the other boats did respond with a reaction, we knew it was because of what we did and not just a coincidence.


We discussed variables some more, and that we tried to make all the boats the same size and start them from the same starting point.  I tried having the kids place them in the water at the same time, but that caused just enough currents to make boats go everywhere!  Here they are finally still, and only move a little when the soap motor boat causes a slight current.
We also discussed how soap reduces the surface tension of water.
(Here is a practical application of soap reducing surface tension.)

We also did the pepper trick.  This is a video I found on youtube.  I didn't video ours.

We also learned about blind studies and double-blind studies.  It was a little difficult for the kids to grasp whether a blind or a double-blind study should be used.
At the beginning of class, I had all the kids to drink some pop (soda).  I had regular Coke and caffeine-free Coke and had previously poured 4 cups of each, labeling them A and B.  I was the only one who knew which drink was in A or B, but I told the kids not to let ME know which cup they got from the fridge.
So they didn't know what they drank, and I didn't know what they drank.
This is a double-blind study.
The purpose was to see whether caffeine makes teenagers in science class hyper.
Near the end of class, the kids all told whether they had drank from cup A or cup B, and I told them that cup A had the caffeine.
Then we discussed the variables:  Some people are more affected by caffeine than others.  Some may have had caffeine for lunch.  (Two of the students did.)  And at least one girl didn't even drink all of hers.
The results were inconclusive.  None of the students appeared any different to me than normal.  (hee hee, normal???)   Some are always more talkative (and busy!), and some aren't, including the two that had caffeine for lunch.

Since this experiment would involve my opinion, it needed to be double-blind.  This experiment was subjective to whether I thought someone was acting hyper or not, so I didn't need to know who had drank caffeine so I wouldn't possibly watch them more than the non-caffeine students.  Subjective experiments involve opinion, and always need to be double-blind.

An objective experiment is one where the results can be measured in numbers.
These may or may not need to be blind.
If there is an experiment to see what grades different types of students make, it needs to be blind so that the students will not know to whom they are being compared, and perhaps perform differently than usual.  But it does not need to be double-blind because the results (the grades) are not subjected to the observer's opinion.
If one is experimenting with the growth of plants, the results can be measured so this is also an objective experiment.  However the test doesn't need to be either blind or double-blind, because well, plants don't know what you are doing to them.  =D














We went over graphs just a little, and measured
the heights of teenage girls and boys.
We had boys and girls, and the ages vary, but this was not an experiment to discuss variables, but just to review graphing.  They had fun with it.
I didn't know my ds14 was 5'10" though!  =)

sMiLeS,

Apologia General Science, Module 2, Scientific Inquiry

►Videos and resources for this module

We learned that sometimes an experiment seems to "prove" something, but actually has faulty results.
I put 'prove' in quotes because we also learned that science cannot prove anything!

In Experiment 1.1, How Does Weight Affect the Speed at Which an Object Falls? the kids dropped several items to see which would hit the ground first.  I divided them in teams of two.  The experiment called for a sheet of paper, a sheet of cardstock, a sheet of cardboard, and a heavy book.  All needed to be about the same length and width.  Well, I wasn't about to let the kids drop books, so we used 4 small removable shelves that I had.  And we dropped them on the carpet, of course.
This experiment seemed to indicate that heavy objects fall faster than lighter objects, but that was shown to be incorrect with our next experiment.

Experiment 2.2 called for the same items and added in a small rock and a paperclip.  This time, however, the kids were to ball up the sheet of paper.  This experiment showed that only because of wind resistance did the sheet of paper fall slower before.  Now it would hit the ground at about the same time as the other objects.
So we learned that in the absence of air, all objects fall at the same rate.  Well, there is air all around us, so you need to look at the object being dropped and consider the wind resistance it will encounter.

So, this second experiment was a counter-example.  A counter-example contradicts a scientific conclusion.  This is very important.  Scientists are discovering new information all the time - and it only takes one counter-example to contradict a conclusion that may have been accepted for many years!

We did not do Experiment 2.3, The Broken Flashlight, simply because I didn't have enough time to "fix" everyone's flashlights.

We did do D & T (you aren't supposed to know what the letters mean until afterwards).
In D & T, the kids had 22 words written on cards that made up one long sentence.  I printed them on cardstock in a light color so they would not show through when turned over.  I had 4 teams, so I did 4 different colors to keep the sets of words separated (mainly for me while I was getting them together!)

The kids turned over 5 words and wrote them down on this worksheet, then made a hypothesis as to what they thought the sentence was about.  Each student had their own worksheet.  I told them not to worry over whether they are right or wrong;  a hypothesis is what you think is the answer.  They turned over 5 more cards, and naturally, their hypotheses changed.  This is the way of experiments.  As you gain more knowledge, your hypothesis will change.  They continued turning over 5 cards at a time until all were turned over.  All 4 teams had different hypotheses, and some were very funny!  This sentence had several phrases and several adjectives, so it could go in many directions.
It was so fun, but I don't want to give it away.  You'll just have to try it yourself.  =)

We also did the Scientific Method in Action.  These were two real examples so the kids got to see how science really works, not just playing around with a sentence.  First we read a little about beriberi and about a scientist who had a hypothesis.  The kids answered questions about what was the hypothesis, how was it tested, should the hypothesis be supported or rejected based on the results, and should there be a new hypothesis, etc.  Then we read a little about the discovery of penicillin and answered similar questions.
Here is also Scientific Method Explained.




These experiments are simple, but are meant to show that a counter-example can refute a hypothesis, a hypothesis may then need to be changed, and that as you get more information, your hypothesis will change or be confirmed.

sMiLeS,