Global Warming: Horner vs. Gore

729 Words3 Pages
Former Vice President of the United States, Al Gore, along with the Panel on Climate Change, won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to bring awareness to man-made climate change. In his article “What is Global Warming” Gore discusses the cause of our rising carbon dioxide levels in the Earth's atmosphere and the dangers if we continue to ignore this problem. He than lists ten simple things to do to help stop global warming. This is completely opposite of Christopher C. Horner's article “Top Ten “Global Warming” Myths”. 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. His purpose is to make these people aware and think about the destruction of their actions in everyday life. For example, he bullet points his findings in a way that makes them stand out more than if they were all in paragraph form. Such as “Heat waves will be more frequent and intense”(315) followed by another bullet point “droughts and wildfires will occur more often”(316). These are clear and precise points written to stand out and grab your attention. Gore doesn't go into the facts of why these things will happen. He leaves these to be further researched by the reader. Gore was able to relate to his readers by appealing to their emotions. He names events and consequences that are scary and can seem very real to certain individuals. This can be seen when Gore states “Glaciers are
Open Document