“Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature” Pp. 1-6 This article features a study that attempts to quantify human effect on global warming and how much we are truly causing. The paper also talks about the need for awareness of global warming to increase worldwide in order for global climate reform efforts to be made. The paper talks about how many false reports on climate change are published, and that knowing the difference between a legitimate and a fake study is important. In the end the paper supports campaigns that contribute to shrinking the consensus gap to help find a general understanding among legitimate scientists.…
Climate change is an occurring worldwide epidemic affecting nations across the globe. In the two articles chosen, both describe different viewpoints on the issue, both with the same consequences at hand. In the article, Point: Climate Change is a Proven Fact, written by Melanie Lambrick and Richard Renneboog, climate change is explained as a result of manmade activities that have created many global consequences. In contrast, the second article, Counterpoint: Climate Change Occurs Naturally and is not a Problem, written by Richard Renneboog, climate change is explained to be out of human control, that it is in fact the work of natural occurrences, like the solar system, that are to blame.…
Where this agreement ends, however, is on the question of its reality. Whereas some are convinced that climate change is occurring, others maintain that the evidence claimed is not credible, and thus, believe the concept is not real. After reading Bill Mckibben’s Eaarth, I am convinced that the need for alternative sources will be in your best interest to partake in. It is common knowledge Earth’s population is growing and will continue to grow steadily. Thus, there will be a need for more resources for the growing population.…
And have come to an understanding that they can no longer avoid or forget about this matter and start taking action to improve. The article has enhanced my knowledge of the effects the climate changes can have towards what happens on earth. For an example here would be the bumble…
Public discussion is frequently a positive platform for opening discussion topics and easy worldwide access. However, in Merchants of Doubt authors Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway presents the dangers of relying on the public or popular platform. One of the major issues is the public platform is the number of people in the discussion only fuels to the argument, thus it takes longer to achieve their objectives. The other issue is the stakes and implications the debates have on policy. In general, Merchants of Doubt teaches readers it is important to understand the source of the issue versus what is being debated and to further examine the purpose behind each side.…
Al Gore is the acclaimed winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, a Grammy Award, a Primetime Emmy Award, and was the runner-up for Time magazine’s “Person of the Year” in 2007 1. He has received international recognition for his involvement in politics, business, and environmental activism. He was the vice president under Bill Clinton from 1993-2001, the Democratic nominee for the 2000 Presidential Election, a member of the board of directors at Apple, and a senior advisor to Google2. He has taught at Columbia University and the University of California, among others3. Despite all these achievements in the fields of politics, business, and education, Gore’s most lasting impact can be seen in his work with environmental activism. Gore has founded…
He mentions that the latest report from the intergovernmental panel on climate change uses the word “uncertain” more than once per page. Thus indicating that even our governments are iffy on acknowledging climate change…
They claimed that there was no conclusive evidence or that there was no sound proof to climate change and that the idea of climate change is a huge debate among scientists. These experts are more accessible to ordinary citizens watching the news because they speak in a manner that is easier for ordinary citizens to understand; while scientists tend to be more boring and harder to understand thus losing their audiences. Due to the fact that the science of climate change in the 1980’s was hard to understand, experts were able to say that global warming was not due to human activity, and that increased CO2 in the atmosphere was a good thing because it would increase plant life on the planet, and people believed them. The hope of scientists at the time was that as more proof and science emerges the public would become more aware and then influence politicians. Yet a decade or two later after the debate began the media still portrayed as a huge scientific debate.…
There’s no way of knowing if everyone in this broad group of “people . . . deeply concerned about global warming” are all unaware of the specific issues and he again leaves out any specifics regarding who these people are (McKitrick 17). These claims made with as much ambiguity as these two seem like an attempt to appeal to…
The correct use of the term, especially by an influential figure aids in the acceptance of climate change’s presence. Research in the article "The Scientific Consensus On Climate Change As A Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence" notes that “at least 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening” (van der Linden et al. 1). The scientific evidence supporting climate change is paramount, yet numerous people--conservative Republicans--continue to believe that the severity of the situation does not exist. Climate change has gained controversy within the political sphere due its negative portrayal of fossil fuels an energy source which Americans have relied on for decades. This financially and politically motivated reliance has left little to no room for alternative energy sources: ethanol, geothermal, solar, and…
Anyone can have valid information, but the way they present it can affect their credibility. In the speech “Global warming alarmism reaches a tipping point” by Senator James Inhofe, he points out the targeted audience of global warming films. In his speech he uses a lot of ad hominems in an attempt to make his target lose credibility or damage their reputation, he uses fallacies against the person who made them to make them appear less credible, and he over uses pathos appeal which caused him to lose credibility. Inhofe’s speech is the least credible because he uses ad hominem attacks to discredit DiCaprio.…
In order to appeal to the public, journalists tend to favor coverage of human-interest stories and exaggerate consequences for emotional appeal. While it is true that the media has reported inaccurate predictions concerning climate change, that does not mean that future consequences should be dismissed. Given the factors that go into predicting the future of climate change, it is no surprise that the UN Commission’s current forecasts are different from its predictions ten years ago. Influences such as how much the levels of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere increase, how the climate reacts to these levels, and natural impacts of the climate are essentially difficult for scientists to predict. While the natural changes do occur to the environment, humans play a role in changes, too.…
CREDIBILITY : I did an assignment about two different thoughts between two environmentalist : Al Gore and Botkins. Al Gore, with the article “The time to act is now”, informed to the reader how bad global warming is and alerted them the need to react now . Botkins with the article “Global Warming Delusions” said that global warming is not a very serious problem and we don’t need to waste money on this problem . I have looked for much research to answer the question by myself as to whether global warming impacts seriously on our life or not and what we can do to protect our living environment. That’s why today I am very interested to share with you some basic information about global warming.…
The problem can even start from the source itself. Climate change is a very complicated and dispersed subject, and it can leave journalist on a loop, which is where scientist enter the equation. Scientist with their large knowledge and studies of climate change are there to relay information to the media in order for it to be properly translated again to the public. However, according to Revkin there is a split between journalists and scientist communication which can impact the clarity and importance behind climate change (247). This can further lead to what Segal explains on page 125, “...communication effort from the traditional core of science media...…
(Gain attention) President Barack Obama once said “There’s one issue that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other, and that is the urgent threat of a changing climate.” (Reveal Topic) This statement by President Obama on climate change conveys how important the fight against climate change is. (Establish Credibility) I became interested in this topic after getting into a disagreement regarding climate change with my grandfather and how he doesn’t “buy into that liberal bullshit,” so I set out on a mission to prove him wrong by conducting research with the goal of fully understanding the climate change debate. (Preview the Body)…