The Uncertainty of Science: Rhetorical Strategies in the Climate Change Debate
In 2015, world leaders gathered together for the United Nations climate conference in Paris, in hopes of reaching an emissions agreement to reduce climate change. The outcome was a global pact between 195 countries, including the United States. The politicians and policy makers of the conference were heavily influenced by a study done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The “Pausebuster” study, published in 2015, refuted a 2013 study by United Nations scientists, which claimed that global warming had slowed down from 1998 to 2013. The NOAA study, in fact, reported that the increase of global warming per decade had increased, instead of
…show more content…
Prior to the Paris conference, in 2013 after NOAA published the paper, Republicans, who have a pattern of rejecting climate change, headed by Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, launched an inquiry into the validity of the report (Rose 9). Rose omitted the date of this inquiry, and strategically placed the information about the inquiry after talking about John Bates releasing the information discrediting NOAA, falsely suggesting the inquiry was a result of Bates’ whistleblowing. In 2013, NOAA failed to comply with subpoenas for their information, but the Daily Mail failed to mention NOAA made its scientists available on multiple occasions (Gallucci 3). Also, critically the Daily Mail failed to report, the result of the inquiry was that NOAA was found of no wrong doing (4). The Mashable article omitted, that NOAA’s data sets were flawed due to software bugs and that NOAA has taken steps to retake sea measurements after releasing the report (Rose 5). The information the authors did not omit, they labeled with a bias towards the article’s ultimate …show more content…
Gallucci accurately labels Rose’s article as the “widely refuted Daily Mail article” (Gallucci 1). She even labels David Rose as a false journalist by highlighting a false climate science coverage and Iraqi weaponry claims (1). Gallucci backs up her labels by using twitter post from Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist at U.C Berkeley and Gavin A. Schmidt, the director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (2). She also uses a blog post from Victor Vienna, a German scientist with the World Meteorological Organization (5). Lastly, she uses a penned rebuttal in a newspaper article by Peter Thorne, an Irish climate scientist, who worked on the NOAA study (5). Rose also uses bias by labeling by presenting Dr. John Bate’s evidence as “irrefutable”, instead of as unverified, as correctly mentioned in Gallucci’s article (Rose 1). He also quickly links the 2015 NOAA study to the infamous 2009 “Climategate” scandal, in which scientists manipulated data before the UN summit (2). In fact, Rose renames the NOAA climate change study to “Climategate 2.0” (3). Rose’s limited sources include an interview John Bates, a study conducted by John Bates by himself, and quotes from Professor Curry from Georgia Institute of Technology (1). Gallucci’s sources are a diverse set of scientists, who can accurately speak to the issue of climate
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
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.
Charles Krauthammer writes an excellent article by attacking the debate over climate change in “The Myth of “Settled Science””. He opens up the article stating that he takes a neutral stance and that neither those who agree or disagree with climate change are right. His main go to target is President Obama. Charles believes that the global warming debate can never be settled. This is because, science is always changing. Based on support of Richard McNider and John Christy, science and technology cannot prove that climate change is a fact or doesn’t exist. With examples of unnecessary mammograms that cause harm rather than good, he questions how can science predict the future based on certain events. He proves that Hurricane Sandy wasn’t the
Currently, there has been evident and indisputable effects of climate-change occurring on a global level. This has caused a rise in the controversy regarding climate change, motivating many to write and speak about this topic. In his essay, “Driving Global Warming,” McKibben (2002) argues that gas guzzling Sport Utility Vehicle, SUVs, are the number one cause of global warming. He also adds that SUVs are the machines for burning gasoline. Although the article is often biased, providing only one side of the argument, I believe that the article is convincing enough to prove that SUVs are the prime cause of global warming because the article invokes logos, ethos, pathos, uses simple language throughout, and provides extensive and convincing explanation.
Bill Clinton signing the Kyoto Protocol and George W. Bush refusing to sign it (ignoring that the Senate refused to ratify the protocols both times) polarized the issue of global warming into a Republican and Democratic issue, where Republicans either downplayed or denied the issue of global warming and Democrats vied for it to be regarded as a problem (Dunlap & McCright 2010). In December 2007, the Christian Science Monitor (an international news organization without Christianity-related bias) revealed that George W. Bush actively suppressed climate scientists to maintain public opinion that global warming wasn’t an issue (Clayton, 2007). This study revealed a series of abuses dating as far back as within a month of him coming into office- the first being a contradiction between what the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) reported on global warming evidence found by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and what was released to the public. When the NAS affirmed that their findings were true and accurate, the Bush administration maintained the idea that global warming is
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
The Editorial Board represents their purpose when they state that, “Radical jihad and global warming are different threats requiring different responses over different time periods. One is a battle against a warped ideology, the other an enormous economic and scientific problem” (USA Today). Marc Morano argues that, “nothing the U.N. is proposing to “solve” climate change would have any measurable impact on temperatures or storminess, even if you accept the scientific claims” (Morano). The Editorial Board makes it clear that their purpose was to prove the importance of the Paris climate talks and that the world can fight two issues at once. Morano’s purpose was to discredit the U.N.’s proposals on ending climate change. However, Morano never mentioned what the U.N. was proposing, which proves that his purpose was not well developed or
The topic regarding climate change has been the cause of several various debates. Whether or not it is real or if it is in fact a hoax to try a raise panic has remained unknown. However there are many people who have strong opinions and beliefs on whether or not climate change does in fact exist.
“Merchants of Doubt” is a documentary showing how scientific studies may not be trusted by the public due to political prowess and through the influence of big companies. Overall, in the film, that global climate change is happening due to human activity. In one thesis, over 500 scientific journals were reviewed between the years 1992 and 2002 that dealt with global climate change and warming. The thesis found that of all of these journals, none of them disproved that humans were the leading cause of this global issue. Following, several people throughout the film changed their viewpoints on global climate change after reviewing true scientific evidence.
97% of climate scientists agree that such increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration are man-made (Global Climate Change: Consensus). Why then is it that the news media treats such widely held views by experts as debate rather than consensus? The answer may lie in the media’s current and skewed standards of what constitutes “objectivity” and “balance”.
But Mr. John Coleman, Co-Founder of the Weather Channel, calls the topic of climate change “bologna” (“CNN”) or untrue. He also states that “there is no significant climate change” (“CNN”), but what Mr. Coleman lacked is that the climate change is not significant but is very subtle. Mr. Coleman infact is a scientist himself
“…Climate change [is] the ‘greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people’”, skeptics like Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma like to say. Climate change is change in climate patterns due to an increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases produced by certain human activity. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, data taken by satellite has shown that the Arctic cover has decreased by 30% over the past 30 years, and this change, which also include change in sea ice and permafrost, in artic weather and climate is caused by humans. Although numerous scientists have confirmed the legitimacy of climate change, there are different views on whether climate change is real or not. Government officials like Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma or Senator Marco Rubio of Florida have explicitly stated that they do not believe climate change is neither real, nor caused by humans (Tom McCarthy, 2014). On the other hand, mainstream media and other media outlets, such as The Independent and The Economist, have reported their findings of climate change and its legitimacy. The Independent (Conner, S. 2011) reported that records of these changes were taken by military submarines, land measurements, and satellite data to prove ice in polar regions are melting faster and faster. Satellites have tracked sea ice since the 1970s and by nuclear submarines since the Cold War,
Global warming has been an ongoing issue for some time. Some people believe it to be true while others believe it to be fake and not caused by humans. However, when reading “Irma and the rise of Extreme Rain”, by the author David Leonhardt, published by The New York Times, believes rising air temperatures are the cause of the extreme rainfall that occurred during Hurricane Irma. David Leonhardt is a notable man who has been in the journalism business for a while now. In 2011 he won the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary which is only awarded to those in the realm of journalism. David is also the founder of The Upshot; a Section in The New York Times that looks at data and graphics to provide information to daily news providers.
There is a dire divide between scientists and politicians in the world that has potential to seriously harm the entirety of the Earth. Nothing represents that divide as closely as the debate over climate change. In a NASA article describing global warming and authored by Holli Riebeek, it was found that an almost unanimous amount, 97%, of climate scientists believe that there is strong evidence to confirm global warming (Riebeek) Many world governments reflect the American congress, in which over a quarter of Representatives and Senators obstinately assert that global warming is a lie, no matter what evidence is presented to the contrary. The depth of the misunderstandings became especially apparent
“When taking the heating of the entire climate system into account, our planet has warmed at a rate equivalent to 4 Hiroshima atomic bomb detonations per second over the past 15 years” (Cook). Our planet is becoming warmer. When scientists add up all the heat warming the land, oceans, atmosphere, ice melting, earth is accumulating heat equivalent to four Hiroshima bombs worth of heat per second. Global warming is a serious issue faced by our world as there has been a significant increase in temperature over the years. But the article published by Dr. Mark Sircus on “Global Warming -largest science scandal in the history” refutes the theory of global warming. Dr. Sircus states that there is no linkage between carbon dioxide and temperature leading to global warming, the sea level is not rising, arctic sea ice extent is now higher and climate change is due to solar activity. Dr. Sircus also points out that that the recent weather changes are not in line with global warming and “we are in the beginning of a deep freeze” (Global Warming - Largest Science Scandal in US History). NASA and the scientific community states that global warming is not a hoax and there is a rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature due to greenhouse gases released as people burn fossils. NASA states that the “key indicators of global warming are based on surface, satellite, and ocean temperature measurements, satellite measurements of energy imbalance and of receding glaciers, sea ice, and