Global warming has been an issue that our society has been battling for quite some time. Many people believe that it is real and there is also people who believe that it is not. In my opinion it is something of great importance, it impacts everyone in the world and you can see the effects of it daily. There is a substantial amount of evidence that proves it is actually a thing, yet people still are skeptical with this issue. Extreme weather patterns, migration and extinctions of animals, as well as rising sea levels all are prime examples of the types of impacts global warming has on the world.

During the late 1980’s is when global warming really began to come to spotlight. Many scientists began to realize that the climate was warming. In 1990 the first IPCC was released saying that the globe was warming, and future warming was likely (History). Since then the talk of global warming has been a discussion amongst scientists and many people started doing research on it. Many people started to realize that human activity plays a big part in the rising temperatures and that we had to find new forms of energy to utilize. 

In an article published by the Australian Institute of Policy and Science a professor, Don Aitkin portrays global warming as being a small issue. In the article the professor is going through and downplaying evidence found and criticizing what other scientists have proposed. The professor does however say evidence shown does prove the globe is warming. The author goes through his whole article formulating an argument that was belittling global warming and then at the end states “there are major environmental questions facing us” (Aitkin 11). He contradicts himself by stating this which makes his argument seem less effective. Since he does not view global warming as the issue it is, I believe he should not be stating things like this. In the article Professor Aitkin argued that “the assertion that the increase in carbon dioxide has caused the temperature to rise is no more than an assertion” ( Aitkin 8). I disagree with this statement. In fact, in a study conducted by NASA they concluded that “the planets temperature ultimately depends on the atmospheric level of Carbon dioxide (NASA 2010). This shows that the professors argument is in fact incorrect and that carbon dioxide does cause temperatures to rise. The author must not have relied on a credible source for this, coming up with inaccurate information. We have been letting off substantial amounts of these heat trapping gases into our atmosphere since the industrial revolution in the 1800s. The global temperature has been rising at a consistent rate since this time period. When you let these types of gases into our atmosphere it doesn’t allow heat to escape our atmosphere and instead gets trapped here and absorbed right back into the planet. Efforts have been put in place to stop the rise of carbon dioxide in the air which is evident with the Paris climate accord. With them constructing plans like this it makes it pretty obvious that carbon dioxide does have to do with temperature. Aitkin argues in his piece that we rely too heavily on climate models to predict future weather patterns and says that these are unreliable in predicting. Aitkins states that climate models “cannot provide evidence of anything” (Aitkin 9). I disagree with this because there has been research done on this that has found that climate models can in fact predict weather. In an article published by The Guardian they went into depth on this issue and included evidence from studies done on this. At the end they concluded that “climate models are indeed reliable” (Nuccitelli). The models help to predict what weather will be like and have accurately predicted the weather patterns we are experiencing now. They also show that we must change our current way of life so that we can slow down and reverse the effects of human-made global warming. 

John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel, also believes global warming is in fact something that is made up by “environmental extremists” (Coleman). Throughout his piece he criticizes the people who acknowledge global warming as being a real issue.  He believes that global warming is a scheme made up by scientists for environmental and political motives and that they have been making up data to work in their favor. This is simply not true, scientists would not be able to get across falsified data and make it get on the platform of importance that global warming now sits atop. There are a substantial number of scientists who have done their own research on this and I find it very unlikely that all of them are coming to an agreement to use data that they have created to exaggerate global warming. It isn’t only regular scientists who have agreed that the planet is warming at a fast rate, but even people involved in our own government argue that this is in fact happening. This is evident because they have taken initiatives to reduce the impact on our environment. Coleman argues that scientists have also came up with global warming as a way to gain scholarly rewards and recognition in the science community; He believes they created this for financial gain and as a way to save their careers from failing. A scientist would not produce these types of results and gain such a large following with fake research. Coleman did not cite any sources or use any data in his article from people who share the same ideas as him, it was just him making claims throughout the whole piece. His argument was weak because you can’t make accusations and not have any evidence to prove your claims. In Al Gore’s Ted Talk “The Case for optimism on climate change” he poses 3 main questions to the audience, “Must we change?, Can we change?, and Will we change?” Throughout his ted talk he goes into depth about effects of global warming and answers the three questions with facts. The basis of his talk was to expose the problems at hand and then he presented the different alternatives we are now moving towards.  I agree that addressing global warming and finding solutions to this is something we must make a priority. Gore presents a lot of promising information in regards to the positive trends we have seen in combatting the global warming crisis which exemplifies that we can shift towards a more “green” future. 

Gore structures his argument in a way that you are not whitewashed and only view the positives, but instead he also pointed out the negatives explaining that we are “in danger of losing 50% of all living species on earth by the end of this century” (Gore). By highlighting the good as well as presenting chilling findings he adds strength to his argument in a way that would promote a sense of urgency towards this issue. After hearing the shocking evidence about the huge impacts on the environment as well as other species a person would be more inclined to accept that a change must occur. Structuring his talk by asking a question, followed by information related to the question, and then ultimately answering it was a successful way to structure his argument. This structure works because it makes the audience think about the question while showing them evidence on it that eventually leads them to see that Gores answers to these questions are in fact true. Many graphical interpretations were presented which gave the audience a visual representation of the facts being presented. The information was factual, and Gore made it easy for the audience to interpret it. 

This was an impactful piece because it promotes positive actions as well as shares information. Gore appealed to the audience’s emotion with his incorporation of pathos which I found to work to his advantage because while promoting a positive change he was also instilling positive emotions upon his audience. These emotions would fuel a person to want to be a part of the change that is taking place and have them feeling good about doing this. An article published in the Huffington post stated that “when you are experiencing positive emotions like joy, contentment, and love, you will see more possibilities in your life” (James Clear, Huffington Post 2017). This proves that them feeling these emotions of positivity will biologically fuel them to take chances and want to help the cause.

The piece adds support to my argument because it shows that it is possible for us to change and move towards green alternatives. All of the points discussed in it effectively prove that more sustainable forms of energy are on the rise and will in turn help reverse the effects we are seeing from global warming. This is a big step forward and Al Gore is one of the main influences on the need to be more green. A point in the piece that really stood out to me was that enough solar energy reaches earth every hour to fulfill our energy needs for an entire year; This is good news because once we start converting more to using solar energy we will be receiving 24 years’ worth of energy per day. Another piece of information I found to be very supportive is that in 2015 Germany got “81 percent of all its energy from renewable sources” (Gore). This is a good sign because it shows that countries besides the U.S. are also moving towards renewable sources. Using these different renewable sources, instead of being conservative and sticking with the old ways, is more efficient and environmentally friendly. Many countries also signed the Paris agreement which is them promising to lower greenhouse gas emissions.  The future of the world is looking greener as more and more countries realize the impacts of greenhouse gases and start to shift towards alternative forms of energy. The U.S. is becoming a more green country as we use “38.2% Wind energy” and “32.8% solar energy” this shows the increase of renewable sources as we are using around 70% of alternative forms of energy. 

In my opinion we really need to move towards using alternative forms of energy. The current state we are in is one that has a lot of room for improvement. Although many steps are being taken to help improve this issue we still need to promote it to people and educate them so they understand the impacts on the world. 
