Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Chapter 4

I think in this instance, Kolbert’s use of the butterfly as an example for the destruction of global warming is a good one based on her explanation previous to her information. The fact that Europeans were collecting butterflies for centuries shows that people care about things that are being destroyed by our actions. Using such a figure as Charles Darwin can bring about any biologically related scientific point easier than using basically any other scientist.

As far her writing, I still like the little things she adds. For instance, describing someone’s facial hair in relation to a movie star is not usually seen in a science book. That makes this much easier to relate to.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Field Notes 2

Kolbert presents a lot of strong evidence in proving that global warming exists. I think the findings that Co2 levels increasing causing a blanket of warmth over the Earth is a pretty impactful fact. Also, reports that the ice sheets are no longer stable, but instead floating on a layer of water.

However, though I am a believer that global warming does exist, I am beginning to believe that this book is more of a persuasion than a factual presentation of the issue of global warming. Though all of these facts Kolbert gives are great observations, I am waiting for a defense. What angles against global warming could be presented? Even if the angles could be presented in a light that made them look bad compared to her angle on the book, it would still show WHY global warming is right.

As far as her writing is concerned, descriptions are the key. If there is any question of what she is talking about, it will eventually be explained with further reading. Her random information is used to break the reading up well, making a scientific book seem more like a person-to-person story.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Field Notes

1. The book starts off in startling fashion. Statistics about global warming from the Charney report, such as the disappearance of the glaciers by 2030 give an instant edginess to it. When she flies into Alaska and the woman tells her that dogs were just wearing masks to battle the smog, it sets the tone of what the author is looking for.
2. I’m a little confused with something on page 18. Is “five P.M.” correct? It looked funny to me, but what do I know. Overall, her writing is outstanding. It’s solid and very easy to follow for a scientific book, simplifying global warming to a more personal level.
3. Kolbert’s time spent with Romanovsky was crucial to the book. For a guy who has lived in Alaska since 1967 to say personally that it’s getting warmer made the first part of this book much better.