The Sky Is Not Falling Analysis

ELA-Literacy.RL.6.6: Explain how an author develops the point of view of the narrator or speaker in a text.

2) Related Text a. Locate a related text that includes and explores the concept of Changing Perspectives. Compose a summary/synopsis of the text (plot/themes/ characters/key concerns). (100 words only)

As a whole, Gore’s argument in “Climate of Denial” is powerful, persuasive, and effective. The points that he communicates are easily understandable, due to his straightforward language and moderately informal tone. Even more importantly, the analogies and imagery that he employs make his argument relatable and vivid. In his goal of persuading the reader, this emotionally compelling narration is invaluable. However, despite its many strengths, Gore’s composition does contain several weaknesses. First,

Arranged marriage is found in various cultures and countries around the world, including Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East; having an arranged marriage is thought of as an Afghani tradition and has been a part of life for many families. The practice of arranged marriage has advantages and disadvantages; it can create more family power and give more financial security. Sadly being forced into a marriage can disrupt the independence of the engaged, most women stop their education when they become engaged resulting in many women being illiterate. This makes it impossible for them to be successful without depending on their husbands. Arranged marriage is found in many cultures throughout the modern world, though in a lot of cases it results in a happy family it can also be very limiting on women and often girls are married before they can give consent.

In 2010, Al Gore wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times claiming that global warming is a matter our generation must concentrate on in order to halt the rapid increases of change to our planet’s climate. He creates a strong, convincing argument by addressing and exemplifying issues pertaining to global climate change.

Gore uses a variety of ways to appeal to pathos and logos. One of the first things he does, is explain global warming, he them proceeds to show a short, funny cartoon to describe global warming. While this short is not exactly accurate, and looks like it is taken from The Simpsons cartoon, it is comical, and he uses this short to intrigue his audience. After drawing us in, he keeps us attentive by sprinkling these little emotional

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

His tone in this part of the speech conveys his standpoint on the climate emergency and shows he deeply believes that we must do something to change our current way of thinking in order for us to believe that we are in an emergency state. Gore explains that our relationship with the Earth has had a drastic turn since the creation of technology and that through technology our way of thinking has changed. As the technology grows our life span increases. While this may seem to be good thing, it has also had a negative affect. With the increase in population, new technology has evolved to the point where we are making a greater carbon footprint, than we have in the past. The newer the technology the greater the demand and the greater the demand the higher the co2 levels rise. We are so busy creating things we have forgotten that some of these creations have negative consequences on our environment.

This adds a deeper level of relatability to a topic that is typically seen as complicated and full of confusing data analysis too complicated for the average person. One of her few uses of logos is to push the point that most people can understand climate change without needing to understand the data. She recounts a time the Canadian government tried to deny the disappearing sea ice through data manipulation (reference). Through her use of pathos she urges people to support climate change without getting caught up in statistical details. Atwood uses metaphors less sparingly then Wallace to describe human’s foolish and idiotic attempts to deal with climate change, such as burying our heads in sand in order to filter what we hear. (reference Atwood). She goes on to compare two possible futures; an environmental utopia where humans are self-sufficient, and a horrible dystopia where humans are forced to eat their pet dogs (Atwood reference). This serves as a rhetorical question as no one would willingly wish to live in the apocalyptic society she describes. The dark themes of her essay are masked with the use of satire and comedy which serves to soften the heavy tone and make light of foolish humans

Daniel Botkin and Al Gore have very different views on the issues of global warming. Botkin contends that the scare tactics used by Gore and many similar thinking environmentalists are simply a desperate means intended to alarm the public and force governments to take actions that are unnecessary and misdirected. Gore alleges that immediate action is necessary to avoid increases in the plant and animal extinction and the spread of diseases. Botkin admits that global warming is a fact, but as a scientist, he cannot agree on the severity and negative effects of the condition. While both men present compelling different arguments for their views on global warming, Gore has seized the attention of the public laymen by writing books and

Consider how the effect of a new perspective has been reflected and developed in a literary text or texts you have studied. Discuss the ideas developed by the text creator about the effect an individual’s perspective has on personal beliefs.

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

Patterson expresses a fear that “Man will be convinced by these climate cultists to turn his back on the very political, economic, and scientific institutions that made him so powerful, so wealthy, so healthy”. By framing his argument in a way that transitions from highlighting the scientific ignorance of global warming to the policies that such a worldview could impact, Patterson attempts to establish a chain of logic that justifies his concern for global warming as an influence on government. The language used in the sentence (“climate cultists” trying to convince “Man”, turning their back on beneficial institutions) also implies to the reader that the proponents of global warming are actively attempting to undermine the institutions that have allowed humankind to thrive in the modern world. This opinion is underlined later in the article, when Patterson contemplates why many “hope” for climate change catastrophe.

They are comparing many different particular ideas and at the same time they are disregarding their differences.