I thought that, for his purpose, is writing style was perfect. He basically used all of the most popular arguments for climate change and talked about them, citing other examples to show how he was right. He cited authorities and used examples as well. His arguments were good, but the tone made the reader feel like the author was just destroying the argument.
As for my opinion, I felt like the facts he presented didn't relate as well to the facts that we normally hear about global warming. He talked about record lows, but didn't say that the average temperature has changed. In fact, he supported my personal opinion that climate change has more to do with extreme weather than just global warming. The record lows show the extremes that are occurring. I am sure there are statistics that can be shown to emphasize the record highs as well that took place. Statistics on this issue are hard to trust, as they are contradictory and I feel like the author's manipulate their audience by saying something that may mean something different than what the reader thinks.
I did think his use of quotes by scientists and even a Nobel Peace price winning physicist was good. That did play a role in convincing me. I still stand true to my position that climate change is real, but this article did open my mind a bit more towards the other side of the argument. It re-enforced my opinion about climate extremes.
No comments:
Post a Comment