Cold Comfort for “Global Warming” Philip Scott’s essay “Cold Comfort for Global Warming” talks about what he considers to be “myths” associated with global warming. His purpose is to convey that, changes in our environment and climate are not all due to global warming. Some are indeed just nature taking its course. He utilizes a sarcastic, yet direct tone in hopes to have readers think twice about the effects of “human induced global warming.” Scott targets the audience of everyday people, as well as “extreme environmentalist and sensationalist journalist” who believe that environmental events are all a result of it being mishandled and polluted by people. Holding credibility as a professor and expert on ecology and biogeography, he uses a logical approach to point out facts that contradict the idea of global warming. Being an expert in this area, definitely helps the overall argument in
…show more content…
It was described as “the largest single event in a series of retreats by ice shelves in the peninsula over the last 30 years”, by the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Center. However, he points out the fact that the shelf was 200 meters thick, equaling to about 500 tons of ice, with a surface area “three times the size of Hong Kong” at the time of its demise. He also pointed out that because the shelf was a floating part of an ice sheet, as opposed to being over land, it does not raise the sea level upon melting. He continues on to state that an ice sheet in Stream C, on the West Antarctic is actually getting thicker, growing at about 26.8 gigations per year. If the demise of the Larsen B ice shelf was indeed a result of global warming, how is that Stream C is doing the opposite in the same environment? These are just some of the facts used by Scott to support his theory that these things are simply a result of Mother Nature running its
It was described as “the largest single event in a series of retreats by ice shelves in the peninsula over the last 30 years”, by the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Center. However, he points out the fact that the shelf was 200 meters thick, equaling to about 500 tons of ice, with a surface area “three times the size of Hong Kong” at the time of its demise. He also pointed out that because the shelf was a floating part of an ice sheet, as opposed to being over land, it does not raise the sea level upon melting. He continues on to state that an ice sheet in Stream C, on the West Antarctic is actually getting thicker, growing at about 26.8 gigations per year. If the demise of the Larsen B ice shelf was indeed a result of global warming, how is that Stream C is doing the opposite in the same environment? These are just some of the facts used by Scott to support his theory that these things are simply a result of Mother Nature running its