2008 Woodie Awards
Global warming
A challenge to our generation
RYAN GAMBLE '06
Issue date: 3/16/06 Section: Opinions
- Page 1 of 2 next >
At Middlebury, we students have the opportunity to not only gain an understanding of the current state of the world, but also to practice the valuable critical thinking skills that will allow us to succeed in diverse occupations and to live purposeful lives. How we discuss important issues such as global warming reflects a more personal matter of what we, as students, take these critical thinking skills to be. Michael Jou's article in The Middlebury Campus two weeks ago ["Think about it, global warming does not exist," March 2] was "written to incite the reader to question global warming." I believe in testing the quality of our knowledge, but I'd like to contribute a better representation of what I believe critical thinking skills should entail.
Thinking critically about a topic requires accurate and precise knowledge of facts. For example, while it is true that glaciers in Greenland are not receding, that does not mean that climate change is not affecting Greenland. In fact, the glaciers are sliding into the sea. A recent Science article (v. 311, pp. 986-990) finds that the speed at which Greenland glaciers are moving into the sea is twice what was previously thought and is accelerating, due to warming.
Beyond understanding the facts, there is a more important issue of the construction of arguments and what constitutes "thinking critically" about a topic. Probably not unlike many other Middlebury students, I learned to write five-paragraph essays in middle school. This was how I was formally introduced to the idea of a persuasive essay where a main argument is proposed, and supporting evidence is presented. But should we give equal weight to any opinion that can be supported with evidence? For example, if we can give some evidence of cooling in some parts of the world, is this evidence against global warming? In examining complex issues, the paradigm that any opinion that can be supported with some evidence must be valid breaks down rather quickly. In terms of the case in question, the scientific community has increasingly emphasized that global warming is a component of global climate change, a model in which increased climate variability and the complex effects of changing climate patterns imply that some regions may undergo periods of cooling. Evidence pointing to slight cooling in specific regions is thus not evidence against global warming, but fits in with the global climate change model.
Thinking critically about a topic requires accurate and precise knowledge of facts. For example, while it is true that glaciers in Greenland are not receding, that does not mean that climate change is not affecting Greenland. In fact, the glaciers are sliding into the sea. A recent Science article (v. 311, pp. 986-990) finds that the speed at which Greenland glaciers are moving into the sea is twice what was previously thought and is accelerating, due to warming.
Beyond understanding the facts, there is a more important issue of the construction of arguments and what constitutes "thinking critically" about a topic. Probably not unlike many other Middlebury students, I learned to write five-paragraph essays in middle school. This was how I was formally introduced to the idea of a persuasive essay where a main argument is proposed, and supporting evidence is presented. But should we give equal weight to any opinion that can be supported with evidence? For example, if we can give some evidence of cooling in some parts of the world, is this evidence against global warming? In examining complex issues, the paradigm that any opinion that can be supported with some evidence must be valid breaks down rather quickly. In terms of the case in question, the scientific community has increasingly emphasized that global warming is a component of global climate change, a model in which increased climate variability and the complex effects of changing climate patterns imply that some regions may undergo periods of cooling. Evidence pointing to slight cooling in specific regions is thus not evidence against global warming, but fits in with the global climate change model.