In March of 1992, Dr. Richard Sanford wrote an outspoken paper opposing the claims of the global warming hysteria of recent time. Sanford discusses how people accept global warming theories as scientific fact without questioning their validity. I can honestly say that I was one of these people who agreed with the media's interpretation of these theories. After reviewing the pro global warming material in the course text, Environmental Science, written by G. Tyler Miller, and reading several articles on the opposition of global warming, I find myself becoming not a hardcore skeptic, but someone that will no longer take information at face value without reviewing as many of the particulars as possible.…
The author, “Contoski, asserts that global warming is scientifically unproven and that the facts reveal that the earth periodically experiences changing climates” (Global Warming Is a Myth). Contoski “denies that carbon dioxide emissions have any noticeable impact on global temperatures claims that human-made emissions are insignificant when compared to carbon output of natural sources that have always been beyond human control.” (Global Warming is a Myth)…
You've looked at a few things that present Peter Singer's argument against the way we use animals for food and other products. Pretend that you're talking to a friend and they ask you why Singer thinks it's wrong to eat a cheeseburger. Explain his argument (or what you take to be the core of his argument).…
In “Climate of Complete Certainty”, Bret Stephens asserts that the scepticism towards climate change results from the total certainty scientists impresses onto the public about global warming, despite scientific errors (Stephens, 2017). He criticizes the scientific community for being misleading with data that he claims has not been thoroughly investigated. With that, it is evident what Stephens neglects to understand is how the scientific community operates and why there is scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change. Climate science does not claim total certainty, but the interpretation of the present empirical evidence points towards anthropogenic climate change.…
Matt Patterson argues in “Global Warming – The Great Delusion” that the alleged scientific consensus surrounding the theory of global warming is based not on fact, but rather on a web of mass hysteria and deceit. Patterson contends that “In fact, global warming is the most widespread mass hysteria in our species’ history”, and that the beliefs of global warming proponents are the result of their own delusional imaginations and a subconscious apocalyptic yearning toward which masses of people tend to subject themselves. While Patterson worries that what he perceives to be the delusions of global warming proponents run amok could prove to be a legitimate threat to the progress of Man, he argues that there is a growing trend of dissenters to the theory among the scientific community that will break the supposed fever of global warming hysteria.…
The purpose of this paper is to create an outline with three levels for a paper that is titled “Global Warming: Fact or Fiction” and support the points listed.…
The idea of climate change, for many, is an opinionated subject with much discussion of whether it is a real issue or just a natural phenomenon. However in recent years it is clear to see that trends in the Earth’s climate and surface temperature has spiked to levels never seen before. Despite all the evidence of the high levels of greenhouses gases and the rise in temperature, many still believe that there is no connection between the two, and that the Earth is just going through its natural cycle.…
Anthropogenic climate change is an establishment phenomenon. Within the scientific community, the question is no longer whether climate change will occur, but at what rate, with what effects, and what, if anything, we can do about it. The biggest culprit in climate change is an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, which is generated primarily through burning fossils. Earth’s average temperature is based on daily measurements taken at several thousand land based meteorological stations around the world, as well as data from weather balloons, orbiting satellites, transoceanic ships, and hundreds of sea surface buoys with temperature sensors. Scientists around the world have researched global climate change for several decades. As the evidence has accumulated, the most qualified to address the issue have concluded that temperatures have increased over the past century, that it is extremely unlikely that natural causes can explain the warming, and the human produced greenhouse gases are the plausible explanation for the warming that has occurred.…
In this essay, I’d like to argue against the general movement concerning animal rights. This movement aims to give animals more rights than is necessary. One of the main people who advocate this movement is Peter Singer. Singer uses many logical arguments that are reasoned and well thought out but are flawed and it will be very useful to show how the animal liberation movement is misguided and unrealistic.…
1. In this paper I will argue that Singer is wrong to claim that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. He claims that human animals and non-human animals with vertebrae experience pain and suffering in the same way. (41)…
Everyday wealthy and middle class Americans across the country spend money on luxury items such as: flat screen televisions, laptop computers, digital cameras, fancy cars, and smart phones. At the same time, across the globe in poverty stricken countries, people and children are living in destitution. Many of these people lack a basic human need which commonly includes nutrition, healthcare, education, clothing, shelter, and clean water. Peter Singer, author of 'The Singer Solution to World Poverty', suggests that all Americans that are financially stable to donate should be donating all their non-essential money to the needy people across the globe. This seems like the morally right thing to do, however Singers argument overlooks many factors in his bias, and leaves to many questions unanswered to make his essay true or reasonable to any extent. Is it morally right to make a hardworking American give up all luxuries to the needy people they will never meet? Of course, Americans should feel the need to donate to the needy people of our world. Although the amount they donate should be entirely up to them.…
Global warming has not been taken serious by the government. The world does not really take it as a threat. Cars pollute the atmosphere more and more every day. The temperatures keep rising, yet, the government still doesn’t believe it is taking place. (Document C) Global warming is not a game, it is something serious. Therefore, the world should be very concerned about it.…
You would think that based on what I have heard from my peers that they are very uncomfortable with the Peter Singers ideas on donating all money beyond what they need to charity. Although they did think that it was a good idea, they didn’t necessarily believe that it was a moral decision. Of the arguments that I heard against Singer, and I did hear many, I don’t think that they are created equal. I’ll mention three in detail and some justifications that I heard that aren’t as relevant.…
Up and down, up and down – that is how temperature and climate have always gone in the past and there is no proof they are not still doing exactly the same now. In other words, climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon, nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels.” David Bellamy…
Every day people in America are buying new and expensive things, whether it is a new car, a flat screen television or that $7,000 engagement ring for their sweetheart. In Singer’s article “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” Singer suggests an eradicable solution, that “prosperous people should donate to overseas aid organizations” to help the needy in other countries that cannot afford even the simplest necessities instead of purchasing those “luxuries.” There are several pros and cons that float around Singer’s argument, the negatives however seem to out rule the positive thinking in Singer’s case.…