Question 4

Both Kluger and Lindzen’s articles deal with the topic of global warming, but Kluger’s article seems to deal more with the causes and effects of global warming, whereas Lindzen discusses the recent trend towards alarmism when discussing global warming. Kluger treats the rise in carbon dioxide emissions as the main cause of global warming and natural disasters, but Lindzen states that not enough research has been conducted to prove this. Kluger discusses the negative effects of greenhouse gasses that have now increased due to a rise in carbon dioxide emissions and the effect that warmer temperatures are having on the poles and sea levels.

I found Kluger’s argument to be more effective due to the fact that he seemed to have more scientific evidence behind him. Lindzen had some good points, but I felt like he complained about alarmism too much in his article. I especially liked Kluger’s explanation of the numerous biofeedback loops that have begun or have been disrupted due to global warming. He showed how the rise of carbon dioxide emissions is related to the rising sea level, the thawing of the permafrost, and recent discovery of drowned polar bears, which is something that wasn’t really seen until recently.