Page 24 of 26

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 2nd, 2011, 6:33 pm
by FueL
The manual said to check soinc.org for a list of concepts, and all the website did was link to the groundwater.org page.

The bottom line is that if there's some ambiguity, a test writer could potentially add in a concept not on that list. It hasn't happened yet to anyone on this forum, so I think the nationals writer will just stick with the list.

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 2nd, 2011, 6:54 pm
by TYG
Okay, thanks, that clears up a lot. Now I actually know what I should practice.

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 2nd, 2011, 7:02 pm
by march0024
Does iodine count as a 'dangerous chemical'?
Has anyone tried using it as a pollutant at state?

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 3rd, 2011, 3:47 am
by havenguy
march0024 wrote:Does iodine count as a 'dangerous chemical'?
Has anyone tried using it as a pollutant at state?
Personally, I would not think it was a dangerous chemical.

For states, we used food coloring. I would just stick with that to be safe.

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 3rd, 2011, 4:54 am
by march0024
ok thanks :)
I was just thinking of doing iodine and the dialysis tubing thing, except I just realized that that would take a little too long :/

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 4th, 2011, 4:08 pm
by Tramsarran
Hmm... I don't know how to do that stuff. For me I'd stick with whatever is the most clear, simple and concise but then again the judges might be more impressed by a more advanced method with iodine and more elaborate methods.
I don't know, would the judges rather see something simple yet thorough or something advanced and maybe confusing?

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 7th, 2011, 6:41 am
by havenguy
Tramsarran wrote:Hmm... I don't know how to do that stuff. For me I'd stick with whatever is the most clear, simple and concise but then again the judges might be more impressed by a more advanced method with iodine and more elaborate methods.
I don't know, would the judges rather see something simple yet thorough or something advanced and maybe confusing?
You don't get points by impressing the judges, though. They are looking for demonstration and explanation. Nothing has to be "real". It is a demonstration, so you get a few points for demonstrating, but there are no guidelines for how you present. I would keep it simple. Making it elaborate would take more time to explain, and the judges might get confused and not give you points. You won't finish if all your concepts are long and confusing, like this post ;) ;) ;)

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 7th, 2011, 10:56 am
by TYG
On the list of concepts, it says subsidence/sinkholes. Is this to be interpretted as subsidence and sinkholes (different types) or as subsidence sinkholes?

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 8th, 2011, 2:26 pm
by havenguy
Maybe subsidence or sinkholes? I would clarify with the event supervisor before you present, anyway

Re: Awesome Aquifers B

Posted: May 10th, 2011, 2:30 pm
by Tramsarran
Yeah, I'd try and get that clarified before the event starts. Just know how you present both or either or.