Should one be concerned about rising global temperatures? How might increasing global temperatures affect us? These are all questions and concerns on the minds of many as they decide where to stand on the issue and credibility of global warming. On one side of global warming are those who believe that it is a scientifically credible concern while on the other side are arguments against global warming and an overall consensus that it is not a threat. Both sides implement several tactics including rhetorical strategies to counter the arguments of their opposition.
Or does our history prove that Global Warming is just a part of nature? There are arguments on the causes of Global Warming; whether it is caused by humanity or whether it is caused by nature and more important there are arguments about the impact of Global Warming; some believe in positive outcomes and some believe in negative consequences. Is Global Warming really all negative or is it possible that there are benefits from Global Warming? The causes of Global warming
These are the clues that prove the climate is changing day by day. Begley suggests there is no certain way to stop climate change due to global warming, so now people need to find out how they are going to make efficient adaptation plans to keep the planet safe from climate changing threat. Rising global temperatures have been accompanied by changes in weather and climate. Small changes in the average temperature of the planet can be a large and potentially
Global Warming Global warming has become a household term. You may believe that it is real or you may have doubts. Either way some people believe it is happening right now. You put on a mask to take a breath of oxygen and keep indoors not to be air polluted. You are sweating because of your green principle not to switch on an air conditioner during the heatwave.
If more people fight to force the government to make wiser energy decisions we can turn around global warming. Many communities are surrounded by nuclear energy plants or other harmful energy plants. This is a dilemma that local communities face when trying to fight global warming. Each individual can only do so much to fight these huge corporations and energy plants. The best thing we can do as a society is establish better laws for what is considered acceptable when creating energy.
Horner is an attorney and an outspoken advocate on the myth of man-made climate changes. Horner's article names one by one the myths of Gore's claims of global warming. In this essay we will discuss the differences of these two men's views and articles. In Al Gore's article he cuts to the point, giving a brief explanation at the beginning and delves into the frightening facts of what will happen if global warming continues. His audience is directed at individuals who are aware of global warming and see it as a concern, but don't know all the facts.
He dose this in order to prove that global warming is taking a huge effect on our climate. Liberals believe humans play a major part of global warming. The conservatives show that it’s the earth natural cycle and that the earth has ben heating and cooling through out history. Lisa Moore argues that the global warming is a lie to get a global warming tax and tells the truth on the swindles the liberals tell. It the article “ Swindles in the global warming” by lisa Moore claims that the liberals are just trying to get money from the government.
Nuclear Energy Is Not the Answer BCOM/275 19 June 2013 Nuclear Energy Is Not the Answer In the race for a greener world, nuclear energy will not be the way. Fossil fuel is polluting the world and killing the ozone, but there are many other solutions to a greener earth than more nuclear plants. As nuclear plants pop-up throughout the world, so do the hazards that company them. The world knows that pollution is slowly killing the plant, and one solution offered to slow down this decay is building more nuclear power plants. Peter Schwartz and Spencer Reise state nuclear power to be the best option to pollution and the earth’s ozone decay.
I would say, from a scientific perspective, it is crystal clear that the employees of the public affairs sector should be inundated with concern for global warming; however, current policy proves otherwise. The segregation or integration of politics and public policy have their pros and cons. Unfortunately, politics rarely exclude personal agendas. Therefore, the issue of global warming gets clouded by other political and personal endeavors that are much more tangible and relevant; which is opposite of global warming’s evasive traits to the “untrained eye”. Political and personal agendas are not a new characteristic of the population.
The raise of the temperature has been affecting humans and animals. Glaciers started to melt really fast which is affecting the animals that live in the north/south pole. Hydrofracking will make us alot of money and would let us to make our own natural gas and wouldnt have to get it from somewhere else but we are harming our environment we havent going to last here if we keep messing with