Global Hoax

Link to Article:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/02/09/top-10-global-warming-lies-that-may-shock-you/#4d7a41d223b9

Conclusions:

    This article is from Forbes magazine, Forbes is a popular business magazine.The article is titled " Top 10 Global Warming Lies That May Shock" by James Taylor who writes about energy and environmental issues. In this article Taylor tries to prove that global warming is not as serious as leading experts seem to think it is. Factual Claims are beliefs about the way the world was,is,or is going to be that the communicator us to accept as "facts". For example, when the author states," Global warming alarmists’ preferred electricity source – wind power – kills nearly 1 million bats every year (to say nothing of the more than 500,000 birds killed every year) in the United States alone." Quotes like these are littered throughout the authors article. They are considered factual claims because the author wrote these as facts without our presenting a source or substantial evidence to back it up.

Evidence: 

    Within the first few sentences of the article it is possible to tell what the author's message is. "Global warming alarmists frequently make false and deplorable assertions (see, for example, my recent column debunking false claims that global warming is causing a decline in wheat production), but the Environmental Defense Fund’s recent fund-raising mailer, “10 Global Warming Effects That May Shock You,” may well set a new low." He begins his article by undermining those who believe in global warming. He calls those who believe in global warming alarmist. He also uses strong language such as deplorable and low to describe the assertions global warming believers make.
                         

Fallacies:

    The fallacy most used in this article is the appeal to emotions fallacy. The Browne and Keeley fallacy, Appeals to Emotion is the use of emotionally charged language to distract readers and listeners from relevant reasons and evidence. Common emotions appealed to are fear, hope, patriotism, pity, and sympathy. This article definitely makes use of emotionally charged language. Quotes that prove this are "Bats drop from the sky", "Lyme Diease spreads" and "National Sequrity threatened." He claims that Enviromental alarmist speak like this to worry people. Then when he tries to prove the alarmist assertions wrong he uses emotionally charged language. For example he states that, " Global warming alarmists' preferred electricity source - wind power- kills nearly one million bats every year." In essence he criticizes environmental alarmists language by using the same emotionally charged language. In my opinion this fight fire with fire type of writing weakens his argument.

My Conclusions:

    I do not at all agree with the writers argument that global warming is a myth. I do however agree that environmental alarmist use emotionally charged language. But, I do think that the author uses emotionally charged language and that this article is almost over whelming to read. There is entirely too much evidence that supports global warming for the author not to believe in it. Also, the bulk of this evidence happens to come leading experts and is constantly criticized. That being said at this point there is enough substantial evidence from highly trusted sources that support the notion of global warming that everyone should agree that it exists. If not these people must educate themselves at least on conceptual ideas of global warming.