Audience: Readers of Forbes Magazine, those with economic/business interests, and America
Message: Global Warming doesn’t exist and is un-ethical, “Greens” are foolish
The article “The Nonsense of Global Warming” written by Paul Johnson does a very good job at using rhetoric to try and convince his audience. Johnson uses several techniques such as ethos, pathos, and logos.
Paul Johnson has ethos located all over this article. Even from the very beginning this skill is used by him being the author: Paul Johnson, eminent British historian and author. All though he is not an expert in the field of science or the environment and has no credence to write an editorial about something such as global warming, because he is an “eminent British historian” he holds ethos. Another way that he uses ethos is by his use of referring to famous scientists and philosophers such as Albert Einstein, Karl Marx, and Sir Karl Popper. He says in this article “I wish the great philosopher Sir Karl Popper were alive to denounce the unscientific nature of global warming.” Sir Karl Popper is a pretty famous respected scientist. I like how he assumes that if Popper was alive that he would agree with him. He has absolutely no way to know if Popper would indeed agree or not he just submits that he would.
This article is also heavily loaded with Logos. One way that his use of logos popped out to me is when referring to Albert Einstein’s Law of Relativity. He refers to how once Einstein had said that if an aspect of his theory did prove itself scientifically than the theory was incorrect. It isn’t something that can be readjusted to accommodate. Later he goes on to denote Sigmund Freud-father of psychology and Karl Marx, their theories, and examples of how they are incorrect. His logic here was “The idea that human beings have changed and are changing the basic climate system of the Earth through their industrial activities and burning of fossil fuels--the essence of the Greens' theory of global warming--has about as much basis in science as Marxism and Freudianism. Global warming, like Marxism, is a political theory of actions, demanding compliance with its rules.” Another way that Johnson successfully uses logos is in the very first paragraph of the article where Johnson terms the summer of 2008 as one of the “nastiest” summers he can remember. Where he is getting with this is that although the summer of 2008 had horrible weather, it isn’t because of global warming. He even refers to a summer back in 1816 to try to prove his point. He is also successful with the allusion of Frankenstein. The story Frankenstein is about a man created monster that was made and meant for good but end tragically bad. This allusion refers to Global Warming, how it is a man made monster that can’t do anything but end bad.
The use of well written skilled literature can have a remarkable ability to play on our emotions and perception of things. Johnson makes an appeal to the audience trying to demonstrate stupidity and lack of education of “Greens” by giving examples such as how their answer to everything is global warming. He even gives instances where they contradict themselves, asking the cause for drought and flooding and their response to both-global warming. If he can make one think that “Greens” are stupid he can denote their cause and raise acceptance of his views. He also makes an appeal to pride and beauty by talking about windmills. He calls windmills “hideous things, ruining the landscape and making an infernal noise.” Nobody likes ugly things, and if he can convince them that aspects of “green” are ugly than perhaps they won’t support it. With the windmills he also talks about how they are a thing of the past, silly and outdated. He appeals that the construction of windmills is a disgrace to humanity.
Johnson is a skilled author and was successfully able to put the field of science onto his playing field of literature to convince an audience of his message that Global Warming isn’t real, that it is something stupid created to generate money. For some he might be successful but it’s important to look at ethos, logos, and pathos to make sure we keep in check what he is really saying and it validity.
No comments:
Post a Comment