The Pros And Cons Of Climate Change

1539 Words4 Pages

In the Climate Change debate, there are two sides, both hoping to make real differences in the lives of Americans. Climate change proponents, or people who believe that the continual emission of carbon dioxide poses real risks, hope to change America—make it a leader in renewable energy and reverse the International Panel on Climate Change’s projected outcomes regarding global temperature and sea level rise. On the other side, climate change deniers believe in a free market, not disrupted by regulation on industry for a cause they believe is untrue. Currently, there is a stalemate in the debate; neither side has gained an overwhelming victory over public opinion, effectively silencing action on climate change. Both sides have major incentive to continue pushing their views, however. ‘Winning’ the debate means vastly different economic, political and social futures. In order to “win” their preferred future, …show more content…

It makes sense that if a large group of trustworthy people believe that something is true, that it is true. This is not always the case though. To make this argument more sound, climate change skeptics should move away from relying on a large support of people toward a large support of facts. For example, it would be far more credible to say that ‘37,487 scientists found through different experiments that the Earth’s temperature has been stable for 200 years.’ Using appeal to popularity got the climate change skeptics in trouble as well. In order to feed the appeal to popularity and include more names on the list, they allowed anyone with a Bachelor of Science degree or higher in any subject to sign the petition. Many questioned whether some of the signatories had sufficient knowledge in order to have an objective opinion of the subject. Therefore, many saw through this appeal to popularity and saw the absence of fact. In effect, they ruined their own

Open Document