Conflict And Controversy: A Case Study

Ted Summative Part C: Conflict and Controversy Energy is being consumed in ways that are not sustainable. This is a serious issue that is already affecting the environment and its effects will only worsen. With any issue, there is conflict and controversy surrounding this topic. There is controversy between people who agree that global warming is a serious issue and those who think otherwise. There is also conflict between people who think global warming will fix itself and those who think action needs to be taken to change this. The presenter in the Ted Talk I have chosen, Rob Hopkins, briefly addresses one of these controversies; however, his lack of mention to this controversy slightly detracts from the overall impact of his presentation. First, this controversy, between people who view global warming as a threat and those who do not have this opinion, is conflicting with the excessive oil consumption issue. For the most part, people who believe global warming is not an issue just want to live on without change and therefore are in denial about the inevitable. It can be argued that “science does not offer certainty” (Jordan), so people take this uncertainty as an excuse to avoid this issue. Meanwhile, the other side of this controversy, the side that believes that global warming is a threat, argue using science. Overall, there is conflict surrounding the plausibility of global warming being a risk. Another controversy, that Hopkins briefly addresses, is that some people think global warming is not a threat as it will solve itself. Reynolds’s article suggests that the Earth has dealt with severe, damaging events in the past; therefore, the Earth is capable of surviving climate change. This perspective uses science to argue its case; likewise, the other perspective uses science to support them. Meanwhile, the other side, which Hopkins believes in, argues that climate change can be stopped. It can be argued that decreasing oil consumption and the spread of greenhouse gases could potentially stop global warming. Overall, the approach to global warming, and whether or not it should be meddled with, is a growing controversy. A current event related to these controversies is how the Canadian oil sands are to be less of a priority, and for a new energy strategy to be developed and put into action (Cattaneo). …show more content…
This relates to the controversies because it shows Canada does believe global warming is an issue and that it will not fix itself. The oil sands provide Canada with economic growth, but the recent Canadian Energy Strategy says that this focus on the financial aspect of energy should be reconsidered. This issue is conflicting though, as some would prefer that Canada maintains its current energy strategy, relating to the opposing sides in the aforementioned controversies. Hopkins briefly addresses the controversy surrounding the idea that global warming may fix itself. Hopkins says that this is not true, but does support this argument. Because Hopkins does not go in depth about the other side of this issue, the impact of his presentation is not as strong. Hopkins does not acknowledge the opinions of others who do not think this is a serious issue, and by failing to do this, he is not changing the opinion that these people may have on this issue. He is also failing