Getting Started

You can't change something unless you have something to change.
Things to start with:
Title: Carbon storage in lacustrine and peatland systems in Canadian National Parks
Looking at theses in my area (paleolimnology, time to hop off to the library.......

Theory or Law?

If you read anything about the Intelligent Design debacle you might have heard something along these lines:

"There is still doubt about the theory of evolution, that is why it is still a theory."

This argument is really a misnomer of "theory". The word theory in the theory of evolution does not imply doubt from mainstream science regarding its validity; the concepts of theory and hypothesis have specific meanings in a scientific context. While theory in colloquial usage may denote a hunch or conjecture, a scientific theory is a set of principles that explains observable phenomena in natural terms. Evolution is a theory in the same sense as germ theory, gravitation, or plate tectonics. Put another way, a scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.

Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.

What about the Law?

A law generalizes a body of observations. At the time it is made, no exceptions have been found to a law. Scientific laws describe things, but they do not explain them. One way to tell a law and a theory apart is to ask if the description gives you a means to explain 'why'.

Example: Consider Newton's Law of Gravity. Newton could use this law to predict the behavior of a dropped object, but he couldn't explain why it happened.

-Scientific Hypothesis, Theory, Law Definitions

The Space Between

I was born after the modern computer was invented, however I was trained in typing using typewriter typeset. Learning typewriter typeset equates to one thing in modern word-processing: I use two spaces after the end of sentence punctuation instead of one. Apparently, this is still cool, but going out of style. According to The Chicago Manual of Style (1), the AP Stylebook (2), and the Modern Language Association (3) all recommend using one space after a period at the end of a sentence. Furthermore, page designers have written in begging me to encourage people to use one space because if you send them a document with two spaces after the periods, they have to go in and take all the extra spaces out.
-More about that on the famed Grammar Girl website

So, I know it's a hard habit to break, but I suppose I will give it a try.

Colons

I was recently writing my Teaching Philosophy statement and I opened up with this gem:
"As a teacher, my goals are: to encourage students to be active learners; to give instruction in new ideas that foster passion; and to create connections between the field of environmental science and the practice of environmental science."

My editor was quick to point out that semicolons are never needed in a list when commas will do the trick. Which got me to thinking about the colon and lists. Grammar girl once again has an amazing page on the issue. Basically, colons are the mark of "expectation or addition". That's because the colon signals that what comes next is directly related to the previous sentence. Which brings us to the golden rule of colons:

only use colons after statements that are complete sentences.

It would be wrong to say, "Grammar Girl's favorite hobbies are: skiing and reading" because "Grammar Girl's favorite hobbies are" is not a complete sentence by itself. (And, really, who would rather ski than stand on one foot?) You can often fix those kind of sentences by adding the words the following after your sentence fragment. For example, it would be fine to say, "Grammar Girl's favorite hobbies are the following: skiing and reading" because you've made the thing before the colon a grammatically complete sentence by adding the words the following.

Thanks again Grammar Girl