Global Climate Change: What’s the Worst That Could Happen?

Craven rejects the current campaign that humanity is the main cause of global climate change. He proves this by detailing the manner human beings make decisions in confusing situations. He proceeds that the future is unknown to every one of us, and we cannot know what it looks like. However, by the power of our actions, we stand a chance to predict what the future may look like. The power in changing the climate impacts lies in our actions. The fallacy with the argument is whether the zero effect of climate change arising from the actions we take could cost further disruptions and possible millions of deaths compared to the changes in the climate. The question is: what if the impact of climate change was quite positive and beneficial to us in the extreme ends? In whatever case, the best decision would be to take the column of doing nothing about it. Nonetheless, Craven nullifies this assumption by leaving the argument open: it can go any way unless we make the way.

Need help with your homework? Let our experts handle it.
Order form

This kind of argument is inductive. This means that the propositions that Craven asserts are strong enough; in case they are true, there is a high possibility that the conclusion is correct.

In conclusion, the actions that human beings take are contributing to the changes to the climate. However, any actions taken have an ultimate definitive impact in our climate. That being said, the cost of not taking any action equally leads to catastrophic loss in our economy and climate. Ultimately, the argument by Craven lacks a simple real-life analogy that would make the argument more agreeable to the public. For instance, at the end, Craven should have added examples of the actual impact of taking action when providing this argument, rather than simply pointing to the need.



Craven, G. (2007). The most terrifying video you’ll ever see. YouTube. Retrieved from