Global Warming: A Controversial Issue

Global warming has become a very controversial issue over the past twenty years are so. While there is significant evidence suggesting a temperature increase will impose serious threats to our world, some still believe global warming is due to natural causes and should not be taken seriously. I believe the article from the Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center titled Global Warming Is a Serious Threat is more convincing than the article Global Warming Is Not a Serious Threat for two main reasons.First, the article that warns of the dangers of global warming uses more fear tactics and shocking statistics. For instance, it quotes journalist Ross Gelbspan when he states
"For all but a small, noisy claque of doubters, the global-warming debate
has long been settled. The consensus: It’s happening; the consequences
will be stark; the world better start moving quickly to prevent the loss of
species and land, an increase in severe and dangerous weather, damage to
the food supply and the spread of disease." Not only did this grab my attention but it acted as a call to action for me to get involved and do something about global warming.Secondly, I felt this article did a better job explaining the scientific terms associated with global warming, such as the greenhouse effect, and gave me a better understanding of why the burning of fossil fuels and the deforestation of trees and rain forests impacted the climate to such a high degree. To explain, the greenhouse effect is the earth’s ability to absorb the sun’s energy and reflect some of it back to space so the planet can sustain life. However, the human production of additional gases and removal of carbon absorbing trees is throwing off the atmosphere’s equilibrium and keeping all of that energy in.
The Global Warming Is a Serious Threat article’s ability to evoke an emotional response while providing a vast amount of data was more persuasive than the article Global Warming Is Not a Serious Threat which repeated that the Earth has always gone through warming and cooling phases as its only source of evidence. Therefore, after reading both articles, my opinions of global warming have not changed and all arguments I had on the topic were discussed. I still believe global warming is happening and is induced by humans. In fact, these opinions have only gotten stronger due to the data the article in favor of global warming provided.

Celebrity Endorsements

Nike is a renowned name in all sporting apparel and equipment. When it comes to golf, the Nike Company claims to be the “industry-leading golf manufacturer.” Therefore, they have chosen the biggest name in golf, Tiger Woods, to be the celebrity endorser of Nike Golf. Since 1996, over a decade ago, Nike has continued to renew Tiger Woods’ multi-million dollar endorsement contract and have given him a cut from the sales profit. The company believes Tiger “has helped take Nike Golf from a ‘start-up’ golf company earlier this decade to the leading golf apparel company in the world” (Sports Business Radio) and generously show their appreciation. Tiger can be seen wearing Nike products from head to toe and playing with Nike golf equipment. Tiger Woods is an appropriate choice to market this product because he knows everything about golf and can effectively use the different products including clubs, range shooters, and balls in commercials and ads. This deal is very profitable for Nike because Tiger is able to wear their clothing line when he does ads for other businesses and can be seen with the Nike swoosh in the millions of photos taken of him. Nike’s choice to use Tiger Wood’s as an endorser may have been the smartest decision they ever made. Since his amateur years, Tiger Wood’s has had an impeccable golf record, lived a scandal free lifestyle and has been very appealing to the public; this makes him the perfect candidate to advertise Nike golf products. In addition, the Nike Company faces little to no risk using Tiger Wood’s as an endorser because it is unlikely Tiger’s actions will damage the Nike Company’s reputation. Especially, since Nike products are sold to children and adults alike. In general, it is more likely parents will buy products advertised by someone considered a role model, like Tiger, versus someone considered a felon, like Michael Vick, providing the endorsement deal with a desirable outcome.

National Parks and Commerce

In The New York Times article, Debate Flares on Limits of Nature and Commerce in Parks, by Heidi Schumann, a national park is forcefully asking an oyster farm to shut down its operations completely. The national park believes “the oyster operations [are] thrashing the eel grass... [And] spooking the mother seals off the sandbars and disrupting birthing season” (Schumann). I found this statement surprising because the article stated the farm was there before the park for seventy years and has impacted the land for quite sometime. I also found it shocking how accusatory this statement was. Especially because it is contradictory to a report produced by the National Academy of Sciences which said there is little evidence to support the disruption of seals and eel grass.
With this lack of evidence to support the removal of the oyster farm, the oyster farm has taken action and produced an array of valid arguments explaining why it should maintain residence in the park. First, the oyster farm believes it is beneficial to the surrounding economy because it prevents the importation of oysters. Next, the oyster farm predates the national park and says the national park only has control over areas of untouched land. This can be proven true since “half the parks have farms or working orchards” according to Gary Paul Nabhan. Lastly, the oyster farm suggests it “is part of the historical working landscape of the area- and every bit as in need of protection as the harbor seals and eel grass that share the bay” (Schumann).
The arguments made by the oyster farm are all valid since commerce has been a part of national parks since their beginning. The parks have been providing food, shelter and riches to settlers for at least a hundred years. According to NVS.gov, the National Park Service states “historic sites to be preserved for all people.”

Demonstration Speech - Manicure

Several components make a good speech. From the content to the visual aids, the quality of the speech is highly contributed to how it is presented . In my demonstration speech which demonstrated to the class how to give a manicure, I provided the content and visual aids but could use improvement in the oral presentation category.
To start off positively, I had a solid introduction discussing the history of the manicure. I feel this was a strong way to start the speech because I did not jump right into the demonstration but provided information to set the stage for the rest of the presentation.
In addition, I feel I did very well organizing my steps sequentially. I began by introducing the materials, proceded through the preliminary steps of washing the hands and priming the nails and finished with painting the nails and adding a top coat. What made this information useful to the class was I explained what all the materials were used for and guided them through the progression of a manicure, explaining the importance of each step, so the class would be able to repeat the process on their own if they wanted to. The only content I would change from my speech is the conclusion. While I feel it wrapped up the speech nicely, I could have done a better job of relating it to the introduction.
The visual aids I provided were both relevant and effective because without them I would not have been unable to demonstrate a manicure. All the visual aids were relevant because each related to a different step in the manicure process. From the polish for painting the nails to the file and buffer for priming the nails, the aids were all effective and allowed me to give my roomate Brie a manicure.
On the other hand, I would like to improve the delivery of my speech. While I talked at a good pace and had an appropriate volume, I feel I could have improved my eyecontact when I was explaining the materials and could have stood straighter to show more confidence and enthusiasm.
It appeared the audience was engaged in my speech and laughed along with me when I couldn't open the nail polish. I think I had the right amount of information but filler words could have been eliminated to give a more exact time.
Overall, I think my topic was conducive to the assignment because hygiene should be a part of every persons life. Also, it is not uncommon for boys to get manicures. Therefore, I think the the girls benefitted because I explained the proper techniques and the boys benefitted because now they can maintain good nail hygiene and not feel like manicures are associated with pretty polish colors.

Choose Fuze?

The fruit drink Fuze, a product of the Coca-Cola Company, has a vast amount of health claims depending on which flavor you choose. For example, the strawberry melon flavor advertises its ability to prevent weight gain and “slenderize” while peach mango boasts it is “refreshingly smart” and can provide the same health benefits as the vitamins it is fortified with. Unfortunately, these nutritional claims don’t end on the product label. The Fuze website, www.drinkfuze.com, states the products range from “low calorie to calcium enriched to antioxidant fortified” but show no supporting scientific evidence. For this reason, it can be concluded that the product’s claims are false and the product is unhealthy overall due to its lack of natural ingredients.
In my opinion, I believe the product’s claims have more drawbacks than benefits. First, when a product claims it can help you lose weight, consumers expect to see results quickly. Since Fuze does not have the backing of any nutritional agencies supporting this ability to” slenderize”, the product simply cannot help induce weight loss alone. It needs to be coupled with proper diet and exercise. Therefore, its claim as a weight loss supplement is falsely advertised. Secondly, just because a product contains vitamins and minerals does not mean the product will induce the affects of those nutrients, especially because the product contains them in such small dosages. Therefore, even if the makers of Fuze are fortifying the drinks with vitamins, Fuze will remain nothing more than fortified chemicals.
The truth about this product is “Fuze drinks won’t do anything for your kidneys, your lungs, or your heart; nor will they lower your cholesterol or prevent you from catching a cold,” according to CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. The drink contains unnatural ingredients and the “CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner urged the FDA to take Fuze off the market until the company complies with federal food labeling law” according to commondreams.org.
All in all, I would not recommend this product because there is no evidence backing its claims. I would say the only way to stay healthy and receive proper nutrition is to eat natural or organic foods.