Matt Patterson Global Warming Rhetorical Analysis

In his essay titled “Climate of Denial”, Al Gore, a well known environmental advocate and former vice president, verifies the reality of climate change and global warming. The piece is an attack on corrupt companies and news outlets that attempt to persuade the public that global warming is not a critical issue. Gore also earnestly conveys our environment’s current state and offers possible solutions that would increase awareness about global warming and begin to revert the planet back to a healthier, more sustainable state. The overarching purpose of Gore’s work is to call attention to the widespread climate change that is occurring. However, he also focuses on the corruption and bias within the media, and their attempts to conceal the truth about global warming. Writing to those who are conflicted about who to believe, he makes a valid argument that defends the beliefs of he and his fellow activists and encourages others to become more active in the climate change issue.

In “Global Warming Impact” Bannwarth claims that global warming’s practically a joke and that people are wasting too much of their time trying to change the environment. Bannwarth points out many reasons to why people shouldn't pay attention to global warming. Because of recent events American citizens are voicing their opinions against global warming and joining in protest across the country, making it an extremely touchy topic. Addressing the American citizens, Bannwarth expresses her thoughts on how they should handle global warming. Something Bannwarth wants to abolish is how it’s  been the main topic of many conversations, while also grasping the values of hard working citizens who don’t have time for global warming.

Rhetorical Analysis of Michael Sivak’s Article “What You Can Do About Climate Change” Almost every aspect of one’s day-to-day life leaves a carbon footprint in the world. In the article, “What You Can Do About Climate Change”, the author Michael Sivak, a research professor of fuel economy and emissions, effectively convinces and informs his readers that highly fuel efficient cars are the most effective way to help prevent global warming by greatly reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Sivak achieves this by employing logos, using a direct tone, and by showing cause and effect relationships to inform drivers that vehicles are the main contributor to harmful greenhouse pollution and convince drivers that emissions can successfully be reduced with

The argument put forward by John Coleman, in his article “Global Warming Greatest Scam in History!”, is flawed mainly due to numerous logical fallacies. “Ad Hominem”, “Guilt by Association”, “Red Herring”, “Appeal to Irrelevant Authority”, “Hasty Generalization”, and “Genetic Fallacy” are some of the logical fallacies that can be observed to prevail in Coleman’s argument. As a consequence, the soundness, validity, clarity, reasoning and consistency of the whole article are insubstantial. Coleman’s premises fail to support his proposition that global warming is a scam, making the whole argument distorted and faulty.

In 2010, Al Gore wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times claiming that global warming is a matter our generation must concentrate on in order to halt the rapid increases of change to our planet’s climate. He creates a strong, convincing argument by addressing and exemplifying issues pertaining to global climate change.

Johnson also points out how interest groups and well paid lobbyist are continually fighting the good fight in congress and the media to get the word out. The author also states how the definition of global warming has now expanded to include any and every weather disturbance, change, irregularity, and spontaneity. The main goal of Johnson is to let people know that scientific theory according to Karl Popper proves that global warming is false and the

The book, “The Hockey Stick And The Climate Change Wars”, written by Michael E. Mann, discusses in depth the subject of climate change and how it has become controversial. Mann refers often to a graph, called “the hockey stick” due to it’s shape, that charts global temperatures over the past millennium. This graph shows the drastic increase in temperatures since the late 20th century. Mann defines the term climate wars to be the attack climate change deniers are taking on the topic, spreading misinformation easily because of their immense resources. This campaign, he explains, is being argued by public relation efforts,

These last two election cycles have demonstrated the importance of climate change in relation to politics and the american people. What is unfortunate is that what seems to be a very crucial and real problem in our human survival, according to scientists, is being debated by people who do not have the scientific credentials to even discuss the science behind the reality of climate change. Those behind the skeptics, have funded a successful campaign against the reality of the facts and have introduce doubt into the sciences.

It is a safe assumption that most Americans do not think in sociological perspectives but using the social imagination and the three main sociological perspectives one can explain how society thinks as a whole. A given society might not be able to put a name to their outlook on society but the sociologist can. With that in mind we can consider the disbelief in global warming and see a shift from a more Functionalist perspective to a postmodern perspective and infuse Marx’s conflict theory in order to makes some sense of why an alarming amount of Americans take stances as these. The scientific community has an over whelming consensus on this issue of the causes of global warming but yet many Americans see it as hoax. This is very perplexing

I chose a global warming ad and it uses the wasteland form of pathos; which is extremely powerful. Wasteland uses fear and negative emotions to get their point across more effectively. The ad puts fear in people by telling them there is not much time until the world is going to end. The hour glass represents the time we have and the water in the glass shows how much time we have until our ice caps start melting and it floods. It urges people to take action before time runs out. If you stare a little closer at the ad, you will notice things that are causing global warming. All the trees are being cut down this is casing animals to lose their homes. Also All the new buildings and bridges are also destroying homes. A lot of cars on the road

Often, the public and “political debate over what to do about global warming is far different from the scientific debate surrounding the issue” (Taylor) as the media publishes discourse relating to global warming which asserts a rhetorical influence through the ideological screen by which such information is subjectively presented to the public. In the example of a New York Times article on the topic of climate change, the author’s decision to discerningly highlight the fact “that concentrations of major greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continue to increase to record levels […] [and] that Arctic sea ice remain[s] at very low levels” (Chan) reflects a selective rhetorical emphasis and dissemination of information that does not include or illuminate other data suggesting a contrary or skeptical perception of global warming. As such, the public depends primarily on the media’s capricious determination of salience and rhetorical delivery to inform personal understanding and opinion regarding the validity and imminence of climate

In 2015, world leaders gathered together for the United Nations climate conference in Paris, in hopes of reaching an emissions agreement to reduce climate change. The outcome was a global pact between 195 countries, including the United States. The politicians and policy makers of the conference were heavily influenced by a study done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The “Pausebuster” study, published in 2015, refuted a 2013 study by United Nations scientists, which claimed that global warming had slowed down from 1998 to 2013. The NOAA study, in fact, reported that the increase of global warming per decade had increased, instead of

Rhetoric essay ANR: 987016 By Nikolay Yorgov Climate change vs. Media One of the great environmental challenges of our time is considered to be the anthropogenic climate change. The topic is one of the most trending ones in the past decade and there are various opinions on its reality. Many claim the existence of global warming, but on the contrary we can easily bring up the argument that there has now been over eighteen years with no measurable atmospheric global warming and a slight cooling in the past twelve years.

Over 35 years ago, climatologist Wally Broecker coined the term global warming in a paper outlining the trends that he was noticing with temperature and C02 levels (Stefan). Ever since then, the debate has heated up on the controversy of global warming. Politicians have even used the issue to boost their campaigns. Some question whether the earth’s temperature is rising at an unusual rate. Scientists perform experiments from glacial ice to observe the correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature. Scientists have changed the debate over the years from debating whether global warming was actually happening to the current debate about what is causing global warming. Therefore, the term global warming in this paper refers to

The problem that the pro- global warming theorists have created is that of social standing and little else. While there may be scientific backing to support some of the theory, the media presents the problem with great sensationalism. Global warming and energy conservation has thus become a trend and losses some of its validity through this. The scare tactics used by the media to “promote awareness” are just that, a linguistic ploy to gain favor. “Awareness of this global threat reinforced public concern and environmental problems and thereby provided environmental activists, scientists, and policy makers with new momentum in their efforts to promote environmental protection.” (McCright, 2000) This statement draws line to the potential benefits that would be received if the pro-global warming theorists were to draw enough attention to the issue. Driven by social empowerment and conviction to environmental protection, these activists misrepresent the actual threat and paint it as being much more