So technically this is the global warming and the environment. As I sit here writing this I don't understand which one I want to talk about. As for global warming, I consider it a bunch of Hoopla. Just like the writing that we analyzed, I believe this global warming to be an attempt from the far left to attract attention to a cause and drain funds. Does it make sense for a man that was beaten in a tight and controversial presidential election ( who political career seemed to be "all or nothing" on the election) then begin to become the flagstaff for the entire global warming buzz? Of course it does! This could not become a better example. For the man who claimed to create the Internet, after losing the election he is looking for any possible way to reach a podium and global warming is his medium.
Let me say that yes I agree with protecting the ozone layer and the environment but I believe that there is unproductive hysteria that is coming out of it. Over the history of time, the earth has shown itself to go through phases where it is hotter and where it is colder. The Ice Age was a specific time of intense cold that was not caused by any outside human interference. Scientists have tried to draw attention to number claiming that in ten years all the glaciers will be melted and the ocean will rise up so many feet. First of all I don't find that very frightening at all; that there might be a possibility that there will be less ice and more water. There are much more impending crises than global warming such as unfriendly or terrorist acquisition of nuclear warheads. But that is not even the point. Even if these projections are true, according to the pattern the Earth has been on, they will not continue to rise forever.
All that being said I do agree with preserving the environment. Even though any of these efforts that we wish to protect will not be lost during our lifetime, it is our responsibility to secure the same national species diversity and beauty to our grandchildren that we are experience. Nearly every year my family and I go on a vacation to the West. On these trips we spend much time visiting and enjoying the magnificent National Parks. We are bless to live in a county with so many diverse climates to enjoy. But with this blessing comes a responsibility to protect what has been given to us. To see the prairie land of antelope pestered by windmills, looking up at a beautiful mountain and then noticing a home littered on the side, watching salmon attempt to jump up a newly constructed dam in vain hurts me. As we as humans become more and more developed we must not sacrifice the beauty of the land for a short gain of money, because once it's gone it can't come back! Just think how special it would be to take your grandchildren on a trip to Yellowstone( just as your grandparents took you) and realizing that it doesn't look one spec different than from when you last saw.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So I feel like Davis and I had the same thought process through this whole blog because we had so many similarites. We both agreeded that global warming was stupid, but admitted that we cared about the environment deeply along with our families. We don't want to ruin the beauty of nature. It is nice to know that someone feels the same way I do.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBrittany Liebenow
ReplyDelete19 April 2010
I agree with Davis because his general ideas and my general ideas were essentially the same. I do not, as Davis does not, agree that global warming based off current evidence exists. I find it both interesting and noteworthy that Al Gore's fading career coincides quite perfectly with the so-called realization of global warming. I, as a result, agree that Gore's involvement in global warming, to at least some extent, was an attempt to revive his career. I agree and believe that the Earth travels through temperature stages naturally and that, if the Earth happens to be getting warmer, it will eventually bring itself back around to be colder again. Another interesting point that Davis and I both brought up, and I obviously agree with, is that we both do want to protect the ozone layer and the environment. Davis makes it clear that he is not just a heartless environment-eating machine. He just does not believe in global warming. I agree with, condone, and respect that.
I also like how Davis described other environmental causes that deserve our attention and efforts. With these causes, it is soundly established that human help is needed. That is a point I personally argued and agree with completely. On a final note, Davis tells a heartwarming tale about the beauty of Yellowstone and other national parks. Using handfuls of pathos, Davis explains how our little grandchildren should be able to experience the same joy. If I hadn't already agreed with everything else Davis had written about, I would agree with Davis after that dose of pathos. His Yellowstone park example is the perfect example for other environmental aspects our efforts should be going to and the affects these efforts will have on us as humans. I, therefore, agree with his example, and, although the example was filled with pathos, I feel that it was the right amount of pathos.