Free Essay Example: Reliable Source vs. Less Reliable Source

The reliable source I identified is an article by Bjornberg, Karlsson, Gilek, and Hansonn. The title of this article is “Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990-2015” (Björnberg et al., 2017). The article identifies several existing studies on science denial concerning the current global discussion on climate change. There is the identification of how the basis for derivations on science denial offers high levels of complexity. It arises from the need to conduct such studies over a specified long period and with consideration of the various existing climatic regions. These organized procedural studies could play a significant role in not justifying the concepts implied by science denial.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The article attempts to relate arguments on the need to organize all research on science denial. There is a selection of several scientific articles (161) published over the identified time frame (Björnberg et al., 2017). All related to the topic of environment and climate with the specification to the aspect of science denial associated with these. The primary goal being the identification of any existing loopholes in these previous researches (Björnberg et al., 2017). The added possibility to further understanding the underlying theories behind these aspects. Establishments from this would aid in rationalizing the impact that science denial has previously had on the development of environmental policies.

The lesser reliable source is that by George Monbiot. Its title is, “How did Michael Moore become a hero to climate deniers and the far-right?” (Monbiot, 2020). The article identifies that denial will always be in existence, and it is only that from time to time, it goes dormant. It also recognizes that climate science deniers have now observed success from the current climatic and environmental situations. From the video uploaded by Michael Moore, there are statements that environmentalists just only seek recognition with the only aim of increasing their reputations globally. The claims that actions of such individuals only just result in more harm to the various aspects of life. The fossil fuel industry identified as the primary source of monetary resources that actualized the arguments based on the concepts of denial (Monbiot, 2020). The claims against environmentalism are based on the discussion that several other avenues need prioritization intending to maintain the earth’s life support system. The article identifies how the film lacks rationality and a sufficient basis for all claims made via the same (Monbiot, 2020). There are specific arguments against the use of natural resources that make sense.

An example is the use of trees as fuel for the production of electricity. Such is wrong and could adversely impact on the environment. However, most environmental leaders still observed to promote the use of biomass and biofuels in the production of energy (Monbiot, 2020). The other claims on how the use and dependence on renewable sources of energy do not entirely assure a reduction in pollution. Such based on the use of fossil fuels in some aspects of running-related machinery. It is not a correctly justified argument.

The difference in reliability arises from the fact that the less reliable source is not peer-reviewed. It can be stated as only being based on the author’s opinions. On the other hand, the more reliable source is an aggregation of other peer-reviewed articles that are analyzed to establish relevance on the subject. The characteristic that makes the first source more reliable is the provision of evidence from other credible resources. All conclusions and deductions backed up with sufficient methodology and analysis—the use of statistical evidence to cement any claims and deductions.

References

Björnberg, K. E., Karlsson, M., Gilek, M., & Hansson, S. O., (2017), climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.066.

Monbiot, G., (2020), how did Michael Moore become a hero to climate deniers and the far-right? Opinion.