Here are three paragraphs from James Delingpole’s ‘Climate Change: The Hoax That

Question

Here are three paragraphs from James Delingpole’s ‘Climate Change: The Hoax That Costs Us $4 Billion a Day’ (the second paragraph is Delingpole’s block quote of Alex Epstein’s book):

___________________________________________________

Alex Epstein, author of the Moral Case For Fossil Fuels, sets out the fundamental problem with the climate change industry here (in ‘The Obama-Clinton One-Two Blackout’):

…Increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.03 per cent to 0.04 per cent has not caused and is not causing catastrophic runaway global warming. Dishonest references to “97 per cent of scientists” equate a mild warming influence, which most scientists agree with and more importantly can demonstrate, with a catastrophic warming influence – which most don’t agree with and none can demonstrate.

That’s it. If you accept the validity of that statement—and how can you not: it is unimpeachably accurate and verifiable—then it follows that the $1.5 trillion global warming industry represents the most grotesque misuse of manpower and scarce resources in the history of the world.’

______________________________________________________

Reconstruct either Dellingpole's or Epstein's argument in premise-conclusion form. Reconstructing both well will merit bonus.

Premise conclusion form:

Premise 1:

Premise 2:

_____

Conclusion:

(Where if you agree with the premise you must agree with the conclusion)

Explanation / Answer

P1- increase in CO2 by 0.01% inthe atmosphere doesnt cause catastrophic runaway global warming

P2- mild warming influence is caused by dishonest references to 97% scientists  

c- misuse of manpower and scarce resources are represented by global warming industry.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse H
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.