Murphy 1

Pat Murphy

Dr. Angela Miss

UWRT 1104-020

January 30, 2017

Rhetorical Analysis

One of the most debated topics of the current date: climate change. Worldwide, the

argument ranges from the top politicians to average citizens, are we or are we not destroying the

Earth? Many are convinced that industrialization from humans has damaged the global

environment, and is moving us closer towards a dangerous world. Supporters of this side cite the

melting of glaciers, the blatant rise in global temperatures, and the increase of severe weather as

signals of the impending change. It seems as if this side is winning this debate too, as more

countries and citizens push to reduce humanitys impact on the environment. Rarely, someone

will take the other side, and argue that climate change is not what many think it is. I am one of

these people in my essay Climate Change: Fact or Fiction? as I elaborates on why climate change

is not necessarily a myth, but our understanding of it is very different from what we commonly

believe.

The paper is intended for anyone focused on the debate of climate change, but more

specifically, the common man involved in this debate. I use my relatability to my advantage, as I

am also someone who is not an expert on the situation, but just a normal person who decided to

do some research on the topic of climate change. I begin with an anecdote about building

snowmen to relate to my audiences childhood, while also tying this story in with the beginning

of my argument, as I find similarity between the melting of a snowman and the melting of the
 Murphy 2

worlds ice. My second audience could be experts on the topic of climate change, who have done

more research, collected data, and tested hypotheses for this debate. However, I identify that I

myself am not an expert, and may be incorrect in my findings.

In admitting that I am not an expert on the topic, I must establish credibility to my

arguments, otherwise they are just personal opinions with no evidence for support. I establish my

ethos by first making my arguments, then backing my arguments with research and statistics. I

reference previous ice ages and similar times in Earths history before explaining why I believe

Earth is still in an ice age. I use a process analysis to first explain how ice ages work in their

entirety, which helps the audience comprehend a possibly confusing topic. I then cite BBC.com

to explain the history of ice ages, and detail past ice ages. This allows me to give details such as

how long these ice ages lasted, how much of the Earth was affected, and how the Earth changed

because of them. In another part of his essay, I explain some mathematics that are used to all of

Earths history into 24 hours, and 12,000 years into .23 seconds, in an attempt to show that

geologically, Earth is fresh off the ice age.

When analyzing this paper, it is important to remember why I put certain things into the

essay, and what effect I hoped they would have. I began with an anecdote about building

snowmen and watching them melt as a kid because it is a smooth introduction, and something

most of my audience can relate to. However, I made sure to tie in the beginning of my main

argument into the anecdote, otherwise it would simply feel out of place and off topic. After my

introduction, I give a personal definition of climate change. This allows me to get my audience

and I thinking on the same page and better understand my arguments. Without it, the audience

might go off of what they previously know or have been told about climate change, which could

make the rest of the essay confusing.

 Murphy 3

When outlining my essay, I chose to write in a modern essay format, in which the thesis

is usually in the conclusion paragraph. This allowed me to openly explore my topic throughout

my paper, without being bound by an introductory thesis and main points. This format allowed

me to dive much deeper into my topic, and make point and arguments that would have been

much more difficult to include had I put my thesis in the introduction paragraph. Another thing

that I enjoy about the modern essay format is that it keeps the reader thinking, and making their

own connections and opinions on my essay. With an early thesis, the reader is told how the writer

feels from the beginning, and often thinks about the connections made by the writer, rather than

making their own while reading. In a modern essay, the reader is not told what the writer thinks

immediately, but instead is presented with information and rhetoric, making the reader create

their own opinions while reading. At the end, when the reader finally discovers how the writer

feels, they can compare their thoughts, and reread to see how the writers statements influenced

his opinion.

Overall my essay is meant to attack the common ideology behind climate change, which I

believe is incorrect and is misguiding a large majority of people. The essay is meant to primarily

teach and persuade. Throughout the essay, I attempt to educate the audience on different aspects

of climate change, such as climate history and climate context, which are commonly unknown,

as I was also unaware of many of the facts I presented until I had done research. The essay also

persuades the audience to think again about climate change, and really question if it is created by

man, or if it is just a function of nature that humans have no impact on. Towards the end of my

essay, I try to leave the paper open, without forcing an idea onto the reader, so the reader may

interpret my essay as they please. While my goal with the paper is to change peoples mind on
 Murphy 4

climate change, I did not want to end with telling my audience what to think, because I believe

that is part of what is wrong with the current ideology.