The essay opens up with McKibben talking about how the political campaign against global warming is flawed because at our current point there is nothing much that can be done to fix it.(Mckibben,1) He then goes to state that humans are the biggest culprit behind global warming and supports this by giving examples such as SUVs and American ignorance.(2,9) He concludes by saying that if ten percent of America were to go green, it still would not save the planet, but ten percent could get the government’s attention to pass laws making everyone go green. (11) To start my response, I am of a personal belief that global warming is a hoax. Over the course of my education, many of the arguments for global warming have been disproven to me. My father and grandfather, as well as my Apologia science textbooks have given me information contrary to the idea of global warming. Therefore, I do not see any point in Mckibben’s argument. The recent weather should provide some support to my belief. My father jokingly said we should sue Al Gore on the grounds that his efforts have caused the ozone laye...
McKibben’s writing style makes it difficult for readers to truly understand the argument he presents; therefore, they are gullible to accepting his opinions. McKibben embarks on a rampage in this article, seeming to continuously ramble on with concepts that fly over the average person’s head. He uses words such as “Class C forest,” “A-2 forest,” “peak-load electricity,” “geothermal drilling,” and “hydrogen sulfide emissions.” McKibben must not be thinking of his audience because for the audience to grasp his argument thoroughly he needs to define these concepts well. If he were writing for a science magazine in which his audience would be well educated in environmental issues, his writing style would be accepted. But this article appeared in Rolling Stone where the audience is not educated on these issues. His bitter and intense voice makes the reader feel as if th...
One key premise that these excerpts rely on is the idea that the changes caused by global warming are irreversible. McKibben argues that we have gone past the point where even drastic changes to how we live couldn’t prevent the worsening of global warming. Even if we were to do “everything possible to make ourselves lean and efficient” the research indicates that is “‘improbable’ that we’d be able to stop short of 650 parts per million [of carbon dioxide],” nearly twice the acceptable amount (McKibben 2010, 13). The author also believes that the changes of global warming are permanent because we can’t reclaim what we are losing. The rainforest, coral reefs, and glacial ice are disappearing and “Once trends like this get rolling, we can’t slow them. We don’t know how to refreeze the Arctic or regrow a rain forest” (McKibben 2010, 28). According to McKibben, the world has reached this point, at least in part, because we have already surpassed the acceptable amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which 350 parts per million. We learned that too late according to McKibben because by the time the research supporting this idea was presented the planet’s atmosphere already had nearly 390 parts per million of carbon dioxide (McKibben 2010, 12). For the author these irrevocable changes mean that “The earth that we knew—the only earth that we ever knew—is gone” (McKibben 2010, 18) which leads to the heart of the text, the idea that civilization will be just as irreversibly changed as the world.
McKibben was only 27 when he finished The End of Nature, and thought that by calling attention to global warming and what human interference has done to the meaning of nature, people would read the book and policies would change. He had no idea what he was getting into necessarily. He never considered himself an activist, he was just reporting (Greenfeld). He provided no solutions in the book, but he did use a lot of scientific evidence warning of the possible impending destruction of nature (if it isn’t already destroyed) interwoven into anecdotes of his own experiences in nature (White 110). The End of Nature is as important as a keystone in McKibben’s career as it is a prophetic message of the effects global warming and the end of human’s idea of nature that has been proved right time and time again through the years.
It is obvious from the tone of this report that Michael Pollan really wants to stop climate change; he just doesn’t know how to make a lasting effect. Even so, he never ceases to pull at the readers’ heartstrings. The author does a great job at coercing the readers to jump on board; the only problem is there is no destination in mind. So, instead of inciting his readers to act out against this problem, Pollan leaves them dumbfounded and uncertain on how to
In addition, McKibben wants to make his audience aware of the importance of being true Christians and following their religious principles. He shares this goal with other environmentalists, and he shows disappointment when he questions the nature of countries like Norway and Sweden versus that of the United States. People are helping those who are in need in places where religion is not a significant part of society (McKibben 271). For example, citizens in those countries give aid to the poor, and help the environment by using public transportation, which reduces carbon emissions. However, in the United States, Americans’ actions are branded with the title of “American failure” because people do not try to be responsible stewards of the earth (271). In Genesis, God put a man in “the Garden of Eden to work it and keep it,” demonstrating what it is that He wants us to do with the earth He has given us (Gen.2:15). It is upsetting that people from other countries, whose actions are not cemented in religious beliefs, are more attuned to what God commands than citizens of the United States. Overall, McKibben’s purpose is to enlighten America and use this essay as a call for action towards positive transformation in American
McKibben further addresses the effects of the amount of waste that happens in America is harming the environment in so many ways. For instance, “Over 100 million trees are cut down each day so that junk mail can be delivered to our mail boxes by way of newspapers, magazines, symphony music and so much more (332-333).” These trees have been scientifically proven to help with the supply of oxygen in the atmosphere, which is needed for life as we know it. It is unreasonable and unhealthy to cut down so many trees and not replace them with new trees, for future generations. McKibben discusses that the amount of time that is being
In the article “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math”, written by Bill Mckibben, he firstly opens up by saying that back in 2012, according to the statistics, we surpassed the global record high for climate temperature in our nation, destroying other previous records. Despite the research and the displaying of data, nobody is doing anything to adress the following issue. Mckibben outlines three distinctive numbers that outline the following issue., 2 degrees celsius, 565 gigations, and 2795 gigtons, which he uses to validitate and support his argument. Firstly, the ongoing problem of climate change in society is fundamentally a matter of individual moral responsibility that is inspired by the insight individuals are intentionally harming the environment. Secondly there is yet to be an effective collective state response to the issue of global warming, despite approaching two full decades of ongoing and reoccuring negotiations and the very near universal participation by states in the UNFCCC. Thirdly, because this issue has been put on hold for longer than it was innitially expected, greenhouse gases are being emitted into our atmosphere, polluting our environment. The South-North issue and an ongoing debate comes into effect as all the greenhouse gases that are created and used in the Northern hemisphere are being emmited into the southern hemisphere. Hence, my thesis is; despite the fact that global warming and climate change has been an ongoing problem globally for years, humanity has failed to resolve thiis issue as it quickly begins to escalate.
In Michael Pollan’s “Why Bother?” Pollan argues that each person can contribute to helping to the environment by erasing their carbon footprints. In my everyday life I experience the choice of driving my car to work or riding my bike. More often than not I choose to drive my car because it is the easier option. I, along with many other people, believe that my individual impact will not cause a larger impact on the global scale. In Pollan’s essay, he makes each person think about the effect they are leaving on the environment and how each person, as an individual, can change his ways before it is too late. Wendell Berry, a naturalist and well-respected and influential writer, was a key factor in recognition of the environmental crisis and how to solve the problem.
Mr. McKibben provides a strong argument call of action for everyone to take action against global warming. But he doesn 't just want action, Mr. Mckibben is demanding action now, and lots of it. Throughout the passage, Meltdown: Running Our of Time on Global Warming, the reader can examine the many ways that McKibben attempts to persuade others to join his movement. When one examines Bill McKibben 's use of rhetoric appeals, persuasive fallacies, and counter augments, A reader can analyze and understand the real claim that the writer is attempting to address.
The first part of this essay discusses what the human species has done to deal with the problem of climate change. While some improvements have been made, the problem has not been addressed aggressively enough to stop the damage. What is amazing about this is the denial of so many people that problems exist. If they do realize the risks, they are simply not taking actions to contain the damage.
It's no surprise to most people that the idea of global warming is a highly controversial and debated topic. But is there any real evidence that global warming is a growing problem or is global warming just a big scare tactic being used to get people to comply with strict government regulations? Global warming is widely believed to be the main cause of rising average global temperatures. In reality, global warming isn't really all what it has been exaggerated to be. Many of the predicted effects of global warming over time have actually been proven to be false all together.
Imagine a world under 2 feet of water and in total chaos. Then throw in almost biblical floods, Fissures in the earth that can be seen from space, and Tornadoes that could uplift even the biggest buildings. This is what Al Gore wants you to think. These statements are completely and utterly false. These accusations upon the people of the U.S. are not true and must be silenced.
There are many different views on whether global warming is actually real or not and possible catastrophic damage it causes. It is a big issue in politics now, everyone is arguing whether or not it is actually real or that it is just a weather pattern. People need to wake up and realize that it is real, just look at the shorter winters and the warmer weather. The Glaciers are melting, crazy weather patterns are happening, so what else could it be? We have more things to worry about as a government though.
Gore, Al. The Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do about It. New York: Rodale, 2006. Print.
The controversial subject of global warming according to a large amount of scientists is not a prominent concern. Over 31,000 scientists have signed on to a petition saying humans aren't causing global warming. More than 1000 scientists signed on to another report saying there is no global warming at all. There are tens of thousands of well-educated, mainstream scientists who do not agree that global warming is occurring at all. If so many scientists believe it is not a concern then why should we think any different? Well, a consensus shows that in reality 97% of all climate scientists agree that global warming is an issue and that it is most likely due to ...