Global warming has been a growing issue to global security, with nations all around the world working to ease the soon possible negative effects. Throughout the world; many media outlets and sources online have covered and have formally addressed this topic. Each media and sources all holds bits of truths inside of them, however, all cannot be entirely unbiased. Most if not online sources covering this topic; list good reasons to battle climate change, due to this they all have their own manipulative techniques used to persuade the audience, favoring the liberal side CNN writes sources and has experts in specific fields to cover a topic relating to their political agenda, Nasa being a very pro-science uses logos to persuade the audience, CNS …show more content…
The article created of which is supported by Nasa, tries to make it clear to the general audience that the issue of climate change is real. Nasa being rated to be factual high on the biased scale can be trusted as it favors no political side, making their articles based on scientific evidence. The article opens up stating “Most climate scientists agree the main cause of the current global warming trend is human expansion of the "greenhouse effect” A strongpoint of which this article has would be its ability to inform the average viewer about the issue of climate change. Due to this article being supported by Nasa, a pro-science website, this source can be trusted as this article would be backed up by the scientific theory. Comparing to the article created by CNN which backs the creation of “synthetic trees”; Nasa’s article would be meant to inform the reader, however, due to CNN’s political biased towards the liberals, the average viewer may see the article only favor the political view due to the biased. Later on in the article it states, “On Earth, human activities are changing the natural greenhouse.” By this statement Nasa’s quote can be seen to inform the average viewer that the “greenhouse effect” responsible for the sudden change in climate, which can all be traced to humanity. After the statement of both …show more content…
Talking about how oil companies are slowly changing their motives leading them to supporting renewable energy, taking big steps into slowing down climate change. Stating, “Climate change is a global issue, yet greedy trial lawyers are targeting the five major energy companies exclusively because they see them as a potential jackpot in attorneys’ fees..” Given this statement the author of the article points out that climate change a global issue, is being supported only to back their personal interests. The article does a good job exposing the hypocrisy of people battling this issue saying, “The case is flawed and relies on fundamentally weak arguments that have been tried before and failed in court.” By relying on weak arguments and not strong factual evidence it can be shown to see why it is biased. The article also points out that oil and energy companies were able to make “significant strides” in progress. However, despite all these factual evidence presented by CNS, the article holds a clear biased towards the conservatives. Its conclusion stating, ‘It is therefore preposterous to suggest that such a matter can rightfully be decided by one judge acting alone in a California courtroom.” By this statement strong language can be seen being presented throughout the article, words such as advocacy, preposterous, and dispassionate. All these words build
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The article was not well-structured because it lacked a good hook and the article was all over the place, in my take. I was persuaded by the author because it had some good ideas and solutions to helping California recover or find its way to recovery. I was mainly persuaded because I felt that this article was written to me and the people of California. I understand and know the current situation of California and its desperate need for water. Being a California resident and seeing these rules and restrictions is hard to imagine because it shows that this drought is real and requires extraordinary action, as Governor Brown stated in the article (Sanchez).
He pulls quotes from Benjamin Strauss, the vice president for Climate Central who has “a Ph.D. in ecology and evolutionary biology from Princeton”(Williamson 2) and Rob Painting, a “true believer who writes for Skeptical Science”(2) who is simply “a former police officer who is really, really interested in global warming” (3). While Strauss is more qualified to speak on behalf of the science behind climate change, the leading climatologists of the world are nowhere to be seen. Instead, Williamson uses these two, less credible, sources to drive his point of opposition further and more
For the my articles or columns used, the shared topic was climate change and whether any actions will be taken accordingly. After reading and evaluating all the information, I have concluded that the article “Republicans Try a New Tack on Climate Change” (The New York Times) by Justin Gillis, presents a clear and well rounded argument that emphases on climate change, its effects on the environment and humanity as well as solutions to the issue. In the article, the writer presents most of their evidence in a logical and scientific way by having them be addressed by an expert: ‘“.. All those things have been ruled out,” said Drew Shindell, an atmospheric scientist at Duke University.” Unlike in the other articles, there is no expertise or claim
These articles help with building the picture that climate change is agreed upon everyone that it is an urgent and real thing is in of
Writers are often told that their work should be free of bias—that by not staying impartial somehow undermines the message they’re trying to get across. Opinionated works of art and literature, however, can inspire societal and cultural reform. In the article "Loaded Words," published in a 2012 issue of Orion magazine, author and activist Derrick Jensen explains why writing should never remain truly neutral and how it’s ignorant for writers to do so in their work when there are issues going on in the community. As this article is written for an environmental magazine, this analysis of the power of language is then used specifically to convince the reader that environmental protection is a top priority in our society. Through the use
This editorial is about Wright’s interview with animal rights activists; who statements make extremist pronouncements but then changes rhetoric, this made Wright disappointed in the activists. The editorial has content of various interviews done with different groups of animal rights activist. The information in this editorial will serve as a support in the paragraph of how strong animal rights have become by providing examples of how the activist goes to various places to burn down labs that unnecessarily experiment on animals. The source has philosophical comparison between humans and animals that can make humans subconscious about animal welfare. The information supplied by this editorial is different from my other sources because it concentration
When dealing with the facts of life, many people like to be lied to because they believe that it would lessen the hopeless feeling the news would bring. However, when dealing with issues such as global warming and pollution, the matter should be dealt with in the strictest and most truthful manner due to the severity of the issue. Many authors have published fictional books about events that may happen if humans do not change their ways, however, it heavily relies on the reader’s emotion to empathize with the main character and some events that occur is speculative. When it comes to non-fiction pieces about global warming, like in the article like “Coming Home,” by Roy Scranton, this article is rooted in statics and real life events and are
Instead of opening by explicitly stating his stance on the issue, Gingrich uses the entire first few paragraphs to compare the governor of California at the time to an incompetent leader of an impoverished third-world country. His thesis begins to materialize in paragraph three, in which his heavy emphasis on blaming the state’s media is made clear. He specifically states: “What reporters don’t seem to understand is that the crisis in California is not electrical in nature—it’s political.” (Gingrich, 2004, p. 400-402). This political theme continues throughout the article, including blaming government leaders for over-regulating the entire electrical supply industry and bashing environmentalist lobbying groups for their efforts.
This upcoming election will pose an especially interesting aspect with respect to environmental science and sustainability. The two main political parties have their party platform statements that include their own viewpoints on some of these issues we face. The scientific fact behind global warming has been supported over time, and we see as a basis, the Democratic Party tends to accept the science behind climate change and embedded these ideas into their Party’s platform. While the Republican Party might not as a whole, reject climate change; however, the Republican Party tends to question or just reject the science behind climate change.
When it comes to the topic of Climate change in the presidential campaign, most of us will agree that the Republicans need to concentrate on climate change and give it top most priority since climate change is indeed one of the leading concerns in world economics and politics today. The latest results from the UTA Energy Poll show that more than three out of every four Americans think climate change is occurring (Poll: 76…). In a recent poll, it was found that 59% of Republicans changed their views regarding climate change which is up from the previous poll of 47% (Davenport). Whereas most Republicans are convinced that the issue of climate change should be a priority for all the government in the USA, there are still a few Republican presidential
It is hard to trust someone who does provide good evidence for an argument. He also appeals to families by stating the affect a future without a majority of the world’s species could have on them, specifically their health. Michael Novacek produces a strong, reliable argument with all of this. While there are people who want to refute his point that the argument that the main culprit, global warming, is fake, Novacek still takes it upon himself to write this article. If he did not care enough, he would not have provided the information to possibly change minds and make a difference.
The purpose of this documentary is to inform viewers of the climate changes on Earth due to ice. Throughout the film I see pictures and videos of mountains, ice sheets, and even the geography of Earth in colder climates. The filmmakers of this documentary are trying to inform us about how the ice on Earth affects our living conditions and can eventually do damage. We as people are the audience because these are basic things we need to know about our Earth to survive. The film states that “four billion years from now, the increase in the Earth's surface temperature will cause a runaway greenhouse effect.