Environmental Concerns
“Should Environmentalists Continue to Be Alarmists?” When it comes to environmental concerns there is always going to be those that tend to care beyond the call of duty, just enough, or not all. Usually, how information is presented and the timing of when it is announced by an Environmentalist can affect how the overall population reacts to the news. It can change their perception of how much each individual will continue to care or not to care for the environment. If for example an Environmentalist made an announcement that a specific area was running out of fresh drinking water during a really bad drought then I would think everyone would be on board to conserve their water resources. In our Global Issues text book we have two sides presented on wither or not Environmentalists should continue be alarmists to the public. One side is presented by Paul Farrell whom feels through Diamond’s 12 global time bombs yes they should. The other side thinking no they should not is presented by Ronald Bailey who believes Farrell leaves out some important details regarding each one of the 12 global time bombs. The 12 global time bombs that were covered between the both of them are: Overpopulation Multiplier, Population Impact Multiplier, Food, Water, Farmland, Forests, Toxic Chemicals, Energy …show more content…
Personal opinions have been established since then on concerning how much the environment has improved or not over the years. According to the text Farrell would like to present his case that the environmental concerns has in fact gotten worse over the years while Bailey would like to present that actually improvements have been made or things are not as bad as they may seem to be. Let’s take a look at 3 of the 12 global time bombs and see whom offers a better case for Population Impact Multiplier, Forests, and
“Should Environmentalists Continue to Be Alarmists?” When it comes to environmental concerns there is always going to be those that tend to care beyond the call of duty, just enough, or not all. Usually, how information is presented and the timing of when it is announced by an Environmentalist can affect how the overall population reacts to the news. It can change their perception of how much each individual will continue to care or not to care for the environment. If for example an Environmentalist made an announcement that a specific area was running out of fresh drinking water during a really bad drought then I would think everyone would be on board to conserve their water resources. In our Global Issues text book we have two sides presented on wither or not Environmentalists should continue be alarmists to the public. One side is presented by Paul Farrell whom feels through Diamond’s 12 global time bombs yes they should. The other side thinking no they should not is presented by Ronald Bailey who believes Farrell leaves out some important details regarding each one of the 12 global time bombs. The 12 global time bombs that were covered between the both of them are: Overpopulation Multiplier, Population Impact Multiplier, Food, Water, Farmland, Forests, Toxic Chemicals, Energy …show more content…
Personal opinions have been established since then on concerning how much the environment has improved or not over the years. According to the text Farrell would like to present his case that the environmental concerns has in fact gotten worse over the years while Bailey would like to present that actually improvements have been made or things are not as bad as they may seem to be. Let’s take a look at 3 of the 12 global time bombs and see whom offers a better case for Population Impact Multiplier, Forests, and