0708244
The article that was examined was published by Louise Grey, an environmental correspondent who writes for the Telegraph. The article encompasses many issues and facts, however the focus of the article is on the scepticism toward the idea that climate change is due to human causes. Recently, the United Kingdom enacted legislation, now officially known as the Climate act, which commits the UK to cutting their greenhouse gases by eighty percent by 2050. Although to many, this may seem like a good idea, many sceptic groups are upset with the Act, and demand to have it overturned. They do not want the act to be in place because they say that climate change is not due to humans, and therefore the taxpayers of the UK should not have to pay for any expenses involved with this act, such as wind farms. It is the idea that climate change is not caused by human activity that is the basis for their opposition of the act. On the other hand, the author also incorporates the opinion of a supporter of the idea that climate change is caused by humans. Although the article is written well, the author does a poor job in providing the evidence to support the arguments made.
By providing both the arguments for and against the idea that climate change, the author makes it very confusing to determine what point she is trying to make. After further analysis, it can be seen that the article is clearly focused 
on the idea that climate change is not caused by humans, however it should be clearer of what the article is trying to prove, and an analysis should not have to be conducted. Also, the author does very little to provide actual evidence for or against the idea that climate change is caused by humans. The only thing that she does to provide some authority is incorporate direct quotations from experts of that person’s field. For example, quotations of a Policy and Communications Director- who works for the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment- were included which provided authoritative information. Other than these quotations, however, there was no direct evidence to support either of the claims made in this article.
Philip Foster, the leader in the campaign against the Climate Act, provides several reasons why this Act should be repealed. His first and foremost reason, being that climate change is not due to the activity of humans. His second reason for not implementing the Act is that it will cost the taxpayers too much money. His first argument is backed by no evidence whatsoever. He makes claims such as “there is no evidence that human input has anything to do with global temperature” yet he himself uses no evidence in his argument. His tactics throughout the whole article involve his criticism of evidence for the idea that climate change is caused by humans. He goes on to say “we should not be wasting any money on climate change through things like this legislation” and explains how much money it will cost the taxpayers, using specific figures: with no evidence that these figures are correct. For all we know, this man may not have any evidence or support for his idea that climate change has nothing to do with the involvement with people. Another flaw I find within this man’s reasoning is that he believes that because it is not humans fault, humans should not be responsible for fixing the problem. I have a very hard time identifying with this view, as well as many other people, because who cares if we caused the issue or not, it is nonetheless an issue, and it is up to someone to deal with it. Foster seems to be very ignorant in this sense. The point is that climate change is happening, and it is up to the human population to solve it, because we are most likely the only ones capable of solving it.
Bob Ward, an expert in the field of climate change, offers contradictory information on the matter. He simply states that “Nobody thinks that climate change is not a problem. The discussion has moved on to what is the best way of tackling the problem and making a transition to low carbon growth”. This statement brings two things to mind. The first being, that quite simply, it is true: most people have just accepted the fact that climate change and global warming are happening. However this brings me to the next thought. Many people, including myself to a certain extent, have not seen firsthand the evidence supporting the idea of climate change, let alone the idea that climate change is caused by humans. Because global warming and climate change have been reported of for quite some time, and by many authoritative figures, such as governments, many people just believe it to be true, with or without seeing the evidence.
As one can see, this article provides some contrary information, in more ways than one. Overall, I would say the article is very poorly done. It is unclear of the point the author is trying to make, as she includes both views on climate change with no apparent view herself. She includes very little evidence to support her ideas, and her sources provide very little evidence to support their ideas. Although the article does provide the sceptical view- a contradictory view to the majority of people- this view is not supported enough for the reader to agree or identify with it. It is an interesting idea to perhaps challenge the idea that humans are the sole cause of climate change; however this article does a poor job in providing the reader with the evidence needed to agree with or refute such an idea.
Gray, L. (2010, October 27). Climate sceptics launch campaign to overturn green targets. Telegraph, Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8088204/Climate-sceptics-launch-campaign-to-overturn-green-targets.html
No comments:
Post a Comment