Analyzing Message in "Why Climate Engineering Won't Work"

When I told my roommate the exciting story of how I saw my life flash before my eyes when I tripped over his shoes coming into the dorm room while holding my engineering project that I almost dropped, the message was pretty clear that this was more than just a conversational piece about my day.  However, recognizing an author’s message, and more importantly their purpose, can be a tad more difficult.

Rgovostes. "Mobile Notifier"
05/27/2011 via Wikimedia.
Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

As Anders Levermann writes Why Climate Engineering Won’t Work, his purpose is direct and clearly stated.  His first goal is to respond to Crutzen’s idea of climate engineering and its popularity among many people.  Secondly, he wants to inform the reader about this topic and show how its potential is actually misunderstood and very flawed.  Finally, he wants to persuade the audience to agree with him that climate engineering is not a realistic solution.

Levermann is not so much upset about the idea proposed by Crutzen as he is about the praise it is receiving.  He believes that many are not seeing the downfalls of the solution and tries desperately to change people’s minds.

The only purpose that Levermann is not focused on is analyzing or interpreting.  He does not feel the need to analyze the reason as to why so many people are drawn to climate engineering.  His argument is concise on the scientific reasons that support his argument and does not believe he needs to focus on what people are “feeling.”

Levermann seems to have an underlying message that almost seems to tell the audience they are ignorant if they think climate engineering will fix all the problems.  He shows no sympathy for Crutzen’s idea and presents the flaws as blatant and obvious.  He uses this to make the audience feel stupid if they believe climate engineering will work.