For the my articles or columns used, the shared topic was climate change and whether any actions will be taken accordingly. After reading and evaluating all the information, I have concluded that the article “Republicans Try a New Tack on Climate Change” (The New York Times) by Justin Gillis, presents a clear and well rounded argument that emphases on climate change, its effects on the environment and humanity as well as solutions to the issue. In the article, the writer presents most of their evidence in a logical and scientific way by having them be addressed by an expert: ‘“.. All those things have been ruled out,” said Drew Shindell, an atmospheric scientist at Duke University.” Unlike in the other articles, there is no expertise or claim …show more content…
But we have satellites keeping a close eye on the sun, and it has not changed nearly enough to be the culprit.” The strategy he goes with is taking the other side and immediately denies it with facts that benefits his point more than the opposing one. Although, Cynthia Tucker’s “Climate Change Looms More Terrifying Than Any Fiction” uses a bunch of stellar evidence, like “A 10-year-old boy visiting from Missouri with his family was killed in a freak accident on an Alabama beach in June when he was struck by a log that had been thrown ashore by a storm surge.” There seems to be a lack of counter arguments that could’ve boosted her evidence even more and propel her work to greatness. For these reasons, I believe that the article, “Republicans Try a New Tack on Climate Change” by Justin Gillis was the most compelling article on climate