Critical assessment of an article by the anthropologist Peter Rudiak-Gould.

Coursework Assignment #1:

The WORD LIMIT is 1,000 words.
The submission deadline is 10:00am on Monday 09 February 2015

Critical review: You need to read and critique the following article by anthropologist Peter Rudiak-Gould: Rudiak-Gould,P. (2013) i??We have seen it with our own eyesi??: why we disagree about climate change visibility Weather, Climate & Society 5(2), 120-132. In your 1,000 word critique you should: (a) summarise Rudiak-Gouldi??s argument; (b) evaluate its strengths and weaknesses drawing upon other literature; and (c) offer your personal judgement on the extent to which you agree with Rudiak-Gould, including a short reflection on why this issue matters.

I would have more relevant information once I am contacted with my writer

Thanks in advance
-
Added on 30.01.2015 16:44
Dear writer,

First of all , let me to thank for your precious time to helping me out with my essay. I would trust that you would write this critical essay according to your best knowledge. Many thanks in advance for doing it so.

So, as You have seen I have added few attachments. I have attached the module handbook just to have some idea on the module itself and to see through the lecturer brain a bit.

Also I have added a supplementary doc. where you can see the reading list, that we are required to read and use in the essay ( not all of it just the relevant ones) . Please read it trough carefully and include some of the authors and reference (Harvard, page number !!! ) them after in your research. And of course, if you find any relevant source, please feel free to add them.

I have attached also some of my lectures slides which are relevant to the essay, maybe you can use them as well . Just make sure , please that you don t copy and paste anything out of it. (also I have attached a chapter which might be interesting) Please, in the critic part, when you have to write your own opinion on the topic, be creative and serious! Please read this trough, but don t copy any part of it as it is a last year student opinion on the topic, therefore is must be different !!!!! (this is just an extra little help, but you can also change the opinion according to what you really feel about the article).

 Opinion;
A strict dichotomy does not exist between visibilists and invisiblists as presented. Scientists are not necessarily invisiblists. Visible impacts in other scientific fields are being researched, such as health effects (Baylis and Githeko 2006). As Rudiak-Gould admits, climatologists are now attributing specific weather events to anthropogenic climate change, meaning they have been physically experienced (Stott et al 2013).
Similarly, some visiblists are alert to the distinction between weather variability and climatic change, and report season-scale shifts; substantiated by climate data (Akerlof et al 2013).
Personal and cultural drivers are important in shaping belief in the visibility of climate change. Both the missionaries reporting the desiccation of the African continent in the 19th century (Endfield and Nash 2002) and the glacial retreat project of natural scientist James Balog (Chasing Ice 2012) have strong personal motivations for their observations to definitively demonstrate anthropogenic climate change: to justify their lifestyle choices involving personal peril and discomfort for the greater good of an unethical humanity.


As you have seen the topic is;

 Critical review: You need to read and critique the following article by anthropologist Peter Rudiak-Gould: Rudiak-Gould,P. (2013)  We have seen it with our own eyes : why we disagree about climate change visibility Weather, Climate & Society 5(2), 120-132. In your 1,000 word critique you should: (a) summarise Rudiak-Gould s argument; (b) evaluate its strengths and weaknesses drawing upon other literature; and (c) offer your personal judgement on the extent to which you agree with Rudiak-Gould, including a short reflection on why this issue matters.

Please read this trough and according it write essay up . I would let you to structure the essay, please make it easy understandable and easy to be fallowed.

In terms of logic order maybe something to think about as;

Introduction Visiblists and Invisiblists  Opinion  Discussion  Conclusion.

This not must be in this way or in this order. I would let you to have free hands, I just wanted to give you some help, but of course it is your work from now, therefore you can shape according to your best knowledge.

Thank you again very much for everything that you will do in order to write a successful essay for me.

Best of luck and I hope to keep in touch with you.

Please do let me know when you get started.

P.s;

You can access the article itself (Peter Rudiak-Gould: Rudiak-Gould,P. (2013)  We have seen it with our own eyes : why we disagree about climate change visibility Weather, Climate & Society 5(2), 120-132.) in the fallowing link ;