Right Brain Vs Conservatives

In modern America few problems prove to be as fundamentally problematic as the theory of human induced global warming. Its repeated coverage from within the media and political arena are influencing people worldwide, putting those who think differently in an outcast shadow. The truth of the matter is, to not believe in human induced global warming has become politically incorrect and unacceptable in the public eye. The theory of human induced global warming can be defined as the rise in temperature through human pollution of greenhouse gases resulting in catastrophic alterations in the earth 's environment. However, human pollution of greenhouse gases is so minor that it is not a contribution to the

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

They argue this because they either do not want to believe that they are harming the environment, they believe the scientists that say its not man made or they might own a business that might profit off of something that causes greenhouse gases to be realised. “Global warming is a part of a natural cycle and there’s nothing that we can actually do to stop these cycles” (Dowd). Some scientist believe when the Earth gets warmer it is just part of a cycle. They believe this because in the past the Earth has had cycles of cooling and cycles of warming. Some people believe that climate change is natural and it will fix itself as long as we as humans don't interfere with the process. The people that believe climate change is natural and not man made are wrong. They are wrong because there is more evidence that humans are causing climate change. It may be true that the Earth has cycles of ice ages and cycles of the Earth getting warmer, but we are speeding up the process of the heating of the Earth. We are doing this by releasing harmful greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The people that believe that mother nature will fix the problem of climate change may be right but the process of nature balancing itself out would take to long. It would take to long because everytime nature would take a step towards correcting the problem, we as humans would take one step back if we keep up the way we are

Both sides of the argument have seemingly legitimate arguments for why they’re right and the opposing side is wrong. Contrary to popular belief, not all scientists believe that global warming is real while some conservatives believe that

Throughout this article, most of it pertained to how the environmental community has shown that global warming is a social problem, while the public determined that global warming is a legitimate problem and supports policies that work against it. However, during the 1990s, the United State’s policies and beliefs on global warming were put into question. This is a result of the conservative movement challenging the notion whether or not climate change and global warming are social problems. The conservative movement pushes this further by using the media, creating policy forums, and sponsoring press conferences for policy makers in order to emphasize their point on how global warming is not a serious social issue.

Regardless of how visible the changes are presently there are changes occurring constantly. The climate has been changing for decades and that is only what we have scientific data on so the changing could potentially be going on for much longer. The people that favor this denial strategy are simply uncritical thinkers who either don’t want to accept the state of the world and the destination that we are heading or that they have too much financially at stake. Those who are in the latter situation have an ethical dilemma because they should agree with the facts, therefore agreeing with global warming but this would then call for action which for businesses especially will be costly. In our day in age, with our technology, it is difficult to claim you don’t believe in climate change. The acceptance of global warming is scary because it’s the acceptance of the destruction and distortion humans have cause to Earth but even more difficult is the response to the enlightenment. However, that is only half of the

In the news report “Climate of Doubt”, PBS FRONTLINE investigates the reasoning behind the relationship climate change and politics has been fluctuating over the past few decades. In 2006, An Inconvenient Truth, a film that called for action against climate change, gained mass attention from the American Public. However, this rally for environmental sustainability created some undesirable consequences. There is a growing movement for anti-climate change by various CEOS, scientists, politicians, etc. that have been marketing against green movements. They claim that climate change was developed out of scientific malpractice, has no scientific backing, and the bad weather we experience is no more abnormal than it was a century ago.

Liberals believe in government assistance to solve problems. The government’s job is to protect its citizens’ rights and the civil liberties. It is also to ensure that no citizen is in need and provide the equality for all humans. In regards to abortion, liberals believe in women’s right of choice. They don’t view a fetus as human life, not granting it separate rights. They also believe that abortions should be funded by taxpayer dollars, if the mother cannot afford it (Editors of Student News Daily).

In short, the basis of this argument other than years of documented research and scientific discovery is what harm could we do by being more conservative in our use of energy and other entities that produce more than their share of green house gasses? The answer as it stands now is none. The harmful effects of ignoring this crisis are all but proven fact.

One other reason why I am against the conservative position for this issue is because sometimes pregnancy puts the life of the mother in danger where the only solution is to terminate the fetus. It shouldn’t be up to the government to tell the women to put her own health in danger to attempt to birth a child. Pregnancy is a personal choice and should be completely decided on by the mother whose body is affected. Another topic I ranked extremely liberal on was global warming and climate change. According to StudentNewsDaily.com, the liberal position on global warming states that it is a direct effect of “increased production of carbon dioxide through the burning of fossil fuels” . This statement is 100% fact, and it is absolutely ridiculous for conservatives to state that global warming is natural and humans can’t do much to change the earth’s temperature. Recently, I wrote a research paper on the causes and effects of pollution in China. I found that due to a rapid increase in the burning of fossil fuels from booming industry, that the environment was being negatively affected both in the earth and in the atmosphere. The government needs to install strict laws to

Everybody has heard of global warming and the anecdote that our grandchildren will never see a polar bear. Near apocalyptic warnings of the future we will have if we allow it to continue unchecked. However, there is a large faction of people who go out of their way to try to downplay the effects of global warming; these people are known as climate change deniers. Predominantly conservative, these people do everything in their power to undermine global warming for economic gain. Climate change denial has a big effect on the scientific community’s ability to focus on a solution to global warming and stems from misinformation and a value of public/personal opinion over scientific research.

Republicans do not simply favor economics over the environment. The real problem is that Republicans mistrust environmental science, and nowhere is there a clearer example of this mistrust than the hearing held by the Subcommittee on environmental regulation in 1995.

Global warming is an issue. **The majority of the right stick their head in the sand on this issue however, not a fan of the left's approach

attitudes toward global warming are shaped by an individual’s personal experience. Which they validate by performing over 2100 surveys across four different states. Respondents were provided with comprehensive information about the effects of several factors on their views about global warming. Briefly put, the study found that views on climate change in the United States were being shaped by a mix of personal experiences, events, and physical changes on the planet in this study most respondents were as although the focus of their data concentrates on the Individual-Level Causes of Belief in Climate Change. They also discover that there are other factors at play that they have to take into consideration, which is what sets this study apart from the one that came before it. Borick and Rabe as oppose to Carlisle and Smith believe demographics – more specifically party affiliation – play a role in an individual’s views towards environmental

All of these sides do have points in the controversial debates can happen over time. Even though Farley had the explanation for the global warming of how it worked and the evidence when the temperature increased. Giaever finds the truthful facts in global warming for several thousand years instead of millions of years. When the planet been existent which does not have the full accurate description, this will bring additional incentives to give the information if it is factual or not. An example from Al Gore the previous vice president, who took the production from the large scale movie called “The Inconvenient Truth” this movie, portrayed the global warming because it has accolades the Oscars Academy Award and the humanitarian award. The movies has grossed