environmentalism are projected to get worse before they get better; therefore, individuals need to start reaching a common ground on how to push the environment forward with conscious eating habits, producing less greenhouse gases whilst still providing sufficient amounts of food for humanity.
Society has overlooked the contribution food has made to climate change. In order to reduce climate change from a food standpoint, following a vegan diet is the only way to do so. Eating fruits and vegetables with less meat is not going to get the job done. If humanity continues the track we’re currently headed down now, by 2050 greenhouse gases will have skyrocketed. These claims summarize the cogent arguments George C. Wang made in the article “Go vegan, save the planet.” He presents claims of fact. He argues debatable climate change evidence that will cause the reader to provide factual evidence to verify the argument. He uses statistical evidence to support his pro-veganism argument, “A large amount of methane and nitrous oxide, gases that are more than 20 times and 250 times more powerful than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas, are generated through livestock-raising activities.” …show more content…
Wang’s audience is centered toward individual’s who are already on board for environmental acts (ex: recycling). These individuals are probably already aware of what they’re putting into their body, but just haven’t taken that last step to fully “transition.” His language is factual, but provides realism towards the end of the article. Wang’s purpose/stance is one cohesive message: change your diet to help the planet out. Chase’s audience is very different. Her audience would be anyone who might have considered veganism, former vegans, or meat eaters. Her language is direct and persuasive. Lastly, the purpose of her article is to for people to continue the consumption of