George Orwell's Essay: The Trump Administration

Climate change is one of today’s most hotly debated topic. Scientists for many decades have made supposed claims that current energy creation and reliance on fossil fuels will lead to inevitable changes to the planet. Today, climate change denial is still a popular to most of the world despite the mounds of evidence to support that it exists. The climate change issue suffers from being mismanaged by various parties through focusing on the wrong issues and the lack of true commitment from the general public, according to Sandra Steingraber.

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.

George Orwell's 1984 What look on humanity and human nature, if any, can be seen through this book, 1984?

Although the climate scientists who say that the climate is changing (about 97 percent by some estimates) far outnumber those who don’t, Gore's comments indicate the strength of the

In regards to scientific facts, Gore explains that when it comes to samples and the analyses of many articles and studies on the matter, “the number of those that disagreed with the scientific consensus that we are causing global warming and that, it is indeed a serious problem” is zero. (Gore) At first, he also uses overemphasis and exaggeration when referring to mass media and its claims that, many

Beyond the emotional appeal to American greatness in solving technical problems, he presents compellingly logical and ethical arguments. He starts by calling out anyone who would ignore the threat of climate change, a blunt shot at many Republicans in Congress (26:11). The president adopts a nonchalant approach, essentially mocking anyone who isn't on board with climate science. "Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You’ll be pretty lonely," Obama says. With tremendous confidence that his logical and ethical arguments cannot be countered, he attempts to win the day by overcoming any emotional

The election of 2000 took place during a time that was mostly peaceful, unemployment rates were historically low, but however, there were a record number of terrorist threats (Muhlhausen). Despite all of these headlining topics presidential candidate Al Gore and Vice President Joe Lieberman were far more concerned about global climate change (“Al”). Gore was, and still, is very passionate about this topic (“Al”, 9). He has challenged the two biggest polluters in the world, China and The United States to, “Make the boldest move in climate change.” Figure 5

With today’s broad spectrum of opposing political ideals, climate change is one of the most polarizing and argued points. In an article entitled “Why Some Conservatives Can’t Accept That Climate Change Is Real” by Carolyn Gregoire, we are presented the supposed thought process and biases held by modern conservatives. The author, Carolyn Gregoire, serves as a senior science and health writer at The Huffington Post. Though challenging competency is a common attack used on both sides of the political isle, this piece sidesteps petty mudslinging and instead takes root in the psychological differences between liberals and conservatives. Inherently, as a political piece, this article criticizes the conservative thought camp. In doing so, this article (like a majority of articles on the Huffington Post) is written towards a sympathetic, liberal audience. Pertaining mainly to psychology, there is no doubt logos is the appeal used by the author. Furthermore, with logos often comes strong, inductive reasoning. As we delve deeper into this article, we also will examine and explore several fallacies implemented by the author. Also

Matt Patterson argues in “Global Warming – The Great Delusion” that the alleged scientific consensus surrounding the theory of global warming is based not on fact, but rather on a web of mass hysteria and deceit. Patterson contends that “In fact, global warming is the most widespread mass hysteria in our species’ history”, and that the beliefs of global warming proponents are the result of their own delusional imaginations and a subconscious apocalyptic yearning toward which masses of people tend to subject themselves. While Patterson worries that what he perceives to be the

Gina McCarthy — who works for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — builds an argument on the importance of science at the EPA in an article entitled "Why Science Matters".

There’s an issue where the underlying science remains a political football, and scientists are regularly challenged and called out personally. Where energy needs and short-term economic growth are set against our children’s health and future. Where the consequences of bad, short-sighted decisions may be borne primarily by a small subset of under-served and undeserving persons. And where the very descriptive terms in the debate are radioactive, words spun as epithets.

“No one man should have all that power/The clocks ticking, I just count the hours/Stop tripping, I’m tripping off the power/Till then, fuck that, the world’s ours.”

In a world where alternate facts and fake news, it would be very important to have scientists to push science deniers to believe in science. It is very important to have scientists to push science deniers because it can not only help the environment but the people as well. One of the main topics is global warming and how it can affect the community. (MotherJones.com) stated “Donald Trump has a lot of things to say about global warming. He's called it an urgent problem, and he's called it a hoax. He's claimed it's a scam invented by the Chinese, and he's denied that he ever said that.” In a world where this is allowed to happen, what would you think this can do to the people of the United States of America. (Donald Trump) has also stated “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” In conclusion, It is very important to have scientists push science deniers to believe in science.

The Book 1984 was written by George Orwell shortly after W.W.II. I think this book really shows us what would happen if the government gets too powerful. It was written long ago and set in the future, but I feel like the message is still very relevant today.

Many authors bring in the theme of politics into their work in order to make their creations more appealing and as a form of expressing their personal views. George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-four” is a novel that contains many political messages to the world. Orwell felt that part of his role as a writer is to serve as a voice of conscience to our society by trying to express the truth as he saw it. The novel was written in a crucial time period in modern history after the Second World War and at the beginning of the Cold War. One can see that the book was influenced by current events of its time mixed with Orwell’s standpoint. He focuses on three major political issues that effect society, which are the dangers of war, class differences