If you order your cheap custom essays from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Argumentation. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Argumentation paper right on time.
Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Argumentation, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Argumentation paper at affordable prices with cheap essay writing service!
Essay , Argumentation, Example, Draft
Has science and technology given mankind the illusion that we are gods? In her article "Global Warming Right Now," Kathryn Schulz maintains that humans will manage to survive the worst effects of worldwide catastrophe. First she agrees that human intelligence makes us more adaptable than fish and secondly she agrees that the climate will adapt to pollution. I disagree with Schulz on both of these conclusions.
On the first point, Schulz presents Henry Jacoby's opinion on global warming. "'Look at it this way,' says Henry Jacoby, co-director of MIT's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Climate Change. 'Global warming is going to cost us, but we're more adaptive than trout. We'll survive.'" (Schulz 7) Jacoby maintains that humans can adjust to change better than lower life forms. Schulz agrees that intelligence and technology will save the human race.
I disagree with Schulz on this point. Humans have existed on this planet for only two million years; whereas, fish have been adapting and evolving for a hundred times that long. Advanced civilizations have disappeared many times throughout history due to natural disasters. Our technology is no match for the force of nature. I believe that too many people, including Jacoby and Schulz, feel our intelligence excludes us from natural selection.
Write my Essay on Argumentation cheap
Tim Burford disagrees with me. He believes that the waters will be affected first and that fish will not have the time to adapt to the changes. He believes that these changes will not affect the human race. Burford thinks that when the waters begin to show the adverse effects of global warming that the government and scientists will still have time to fix everything and save humanity from disaster.
I think that Burford does not see the reality of the situation. If the effects of global warming manage to wipe out a species before we decide to react to it, there will be no quick fix. Also, the changes have already had adverse effects on the human race. Droughts have destroyed many crops. Populated islands are being swallowed by rising sea levels. And deadly viruses, which thrive in warmer climates, have found their way into the United States. Burford places an unwarranted amount of trust in political leaders and scientists who serve their own hidden agendas.
On the second point, Schulz presents Schneider of Stanford's opinion on global warming. "Stanford's Schneider puts it this way 'What we do in the next thirty years will precondition the climate system. If we keep our emissions from growing, or increase them slowly, we may be OK.'" (Schulz 7) Schneider maintains that we only need to slow down our release of pollutants into the atmosphere and the climate will adapt to us. Schulz agrees that no drastic changes are necessary to save the planet.
I disagree with Schulz on this point. It has only taken the human race about two hundred years of pollution to bring us to the brink of destruction. If we continue, it will drop us over the edge. What is a preconditioned climate? This implies that the climate will get used to pollution and stop behaving erratically. Climates do not adapt. Six billion people polluting the atmosphere at a reduced rate will still release a phenomenal amount of toxins into the air. I do not agree with Schneider and Schulz's estimation of the situation.
Burford disagrees with me. He believes that scientists can eventually develop technology to recycle the pollution already in the atmosphere and use it to our advantage. He believes we still have plenty of time to develop this technology. He does not believe the current pollution has placed the atmosphere into a critical condition.
I think that Burford's view focuses on science fiction. He has too much faith in the abilities of science and technology. Tim has this comic book vision of supermen saving the world at the last possible moment. Scientists have studied destructive weather patterns since the beginnings of science and do not have any more power than a fabled rainmaker. Burford's view is hopeful but unrealistic.
I absolutely do not agree with Schulz's assessment of the durability of the human race. I do not agree with Schulz that humans can adapt better than other life forms. I also disagree with her belief that we do not need to make drastic changes to save the planet. The statements of Jacoby and Schneider, presented by Schulz, imply that humans can control nature and the elements. Without drastic changes now, we will discover that rather than gods we are merely fish with toys.
Works Cited
Schulz, Kathryn. "Global Warming Right Now." Rolling Stone Feb 00 5-7.
Please note that this sample paper on Argumentation is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Argumentation, we are here to assist you. Your cheap research papers on Argumentation will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment from cheap essay writing service and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
