My argumentative essay aims to prove that the environment being affected by climate change and persuade readers to believe, as I do, that our actions are ruining our planet. In addressing this issue I plan to discuss how humans are at fault for the current warming trends and weather extremes. The admission of human guilt is a key point as it makes the solution to the problem most apparent. We have to make our use of energy far more efficient lest we destroy our greatest resource, Earth. 

Humanities' use, or better, misuse, of resources should be important to everyone. We all share this ecosystem and are responsible for leaving it in good condition for later generations. We do not inherit all that surrounds us, it is merely borrowed. Since a young age I, and many others, have enjoyed time outdoors playing sports, mountain biking, and hiking. Our consumeristic, supply hogging, way of life jeopardizes those experiences for all who share these interests.

My research exigence shows two primary moral traits. I support conservation, and have respect our fellow creatures. We should conserve not only for economic reasons, but for the environment as well. While the animals we share the planet with cannot speak or defend themselves, they can experience pain and suffering. The decimation of wildlife habitats displaces and ultimately leads to the death of creatures who have a right to life.

At this point I have no true qualifications and my name carries no value or reputation on this matter. Through research, credible sources, and logical arguments I plan to gain some credit as a valid authority on the subject. 

My first source is "The Consequences of Climate Change" by NASA. NASA states that old predictions about climate change are becoming a reality. "Loss of sea ice, accelerated sea level rise and longer, more intense heat waves", are to be expected from warming trend of our planet. NASA supports this by providing the observable effects already occurring, "Glaciers have shrunk, ice on rivers and lakes is breaking up earlier, plant and animal ranges have shifted and trees are flowering sooner." The people of NASA surely value the preservation of our ecosystem as well as the lives of the animals that inhabit it. NASA is quite a credible source; they are one, if not the most, advanced space program humanity has to offer. While NASA looks to explore other planets, they also study Earth, they recently received 2.4 billion dollars specifically to study climate change (Expenditures Report). Their credibility is unquestionable, but there is a small possibility of bias. It's possible, however unlikely, that NASA overstates the dangers of climate change to increase their government funding.

The Environmental Defense Fund is my second source. The subtitle of the article is "A warming atmosphere leaves little unscathed". This source focuses primarily on the water systems that are becoming unbalanced, causing weather extremes, changing habitats, and causing risk to human health. In support of these claims the EDF describes the melting of the cryosphere (naturally frozen water), the acidification of the ocean, and the quicker evaporation of water to be the causes of these harmful effects. The EDF puts an emphasis on animals and poorer agricultural societies that get the worst of climate change. They take interest in defending those who cannot defend themselves. The Environmental Defense Fund shows their credibility by providing sources clearly at the end of their articles. They also have an entire page dedicated the the members of their team including expert staff in each area of climate change. In the eyes of some readers their credibility may be reduced because their name includes "Fund" and they prominently show "Donate now" on all pages of the website, which could give an appearance of a profit motive. 

My third and final source is the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Over the last several decades climate change has been observed negative impacting Earth. The changes are expected to continue and become worse as time goes on. The EPA uses change models to display how the climate will continue to degrade. They support their finds using data from past years to project where we will be at our current rate of consumption. The focus seems to be on how climate change will harm humans and our society. This may be an attempt to attract the attention of those who do not have a world view based on ecocentrism but instead, anthropocentrism. This source appears to have high credibility and moderate bias. While their main goal is to discuss climate change and defend the environment, the defense of their statements through facts is exhaustive. 

There are many people who acknowledge climate change is happening, but think it's not actually an issue.  These "deniers" have scientific studies to support their claims as well. I intend to defend the claim that human actions are ruining our planet. My sources covered two different aspects of climate change, the current happenings and the future happenings. All evidence and claims corroborated with one-another. In fact, the Environmental Protection Agency quoted NASA in the "Future Climate Change" article. While the sources agreed, they did show different perspectives and time frames. For example, The Environmental Defense Fund seemed to focus on the beings inhabiting areas impacted and those in lesser developed countries who were suffering because of industrialized nations. The EPA's focus on future effects here in the United States brings the problem closer to home and prevents the idea of externalizing the consequences of our behavior. After talking with Professor Ivy for some time, I believe the research exigence used here is adequate to be discussed fully in ten pages. 

