JADIE KIM ARTICLE

JADIE KIM

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080821164304.htm

title: Climate Change Could Be Impetus For Wars, Other Conflicts, Expert Says

The article suggests that climate change, in short global warming, may lead to armed conflict due to a lack of freshwater resources, food insecurity, natural disasters and environmental migration. The main source of information comes from Jürgen Scheffran, a research scientist in the Program in Arms Control, Disarmament and International Security and the Center for Advanced BioEnergy Research at Illinois. He is one of the people who are concerned that ‘climate-change-related damage’ would result in fierce competition for natural resources, thus triggering wars and other conflicts in the future.

This article was written by Science daily, a well know source for the latest news and research but it doesn’t mention the name of the writer. This undermines the credibility of the content because no matter how popular Science daily may be, the readers do not even know if the writer is qualified to discuss such subject. However, the fact that the writer quotes Jürgen Scheffran’s statements makes the content of the article seem pretty convincing due to Scheffran’s reputation.

Out of all the articles I have read so far, this one is most biased, I should say. The writer presents only a one-sided argument, thus limiting the reader’s point of view by omitting the counter argument. In the end, he sort of adds a different point of view as “However, as history has demonstrated, humans are quite capable of adapting to changing climate conditions as long as those changes are moderate.” Also, he mentions that raised public awareness and educational efforts to deal with climate change are taking place today. Yet, these statements are not direct refutations of his statement that global warming could potentially lead to wars. I am not sure why the writer avoided presenting counter arguments. But by doing so, he is greatly undermining the reliability of his only article.

I think that the writer depended too much on a single source for the information. Other than the direct quotations of Jürgen Scheffran, there seems to be no other source having been used. Therefore, this article lacks diversity in the content, information, and view points, thus being very limited in scope.