Contextual Analysis Topic: I would like to find out what more is being done to prevent N.S.A surveillance without encryption and how this effects our Constitutional Rights.

How Social Media creates a Barrier:
I feel it is good to look at other opinions besides what you might find on Social Media especially from Scholarly Sources. Here is my experience with the topic of Global Warming.

After reading a few articles about global warming my thoughts on the first article have changed. My assignment is to look at barriers of global warming ideas.

The first article I read was from One The Media, entitled “Case Closed” 04 April 2014 with Brooke Gladstone. It reports that the “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or the IPCC is yes, packed with evidence that global warming is a palpable threat”. It also talks about why there are less mainstream articles against global warming ideas. It says it is because the IPCC has been friendlier with the media rather than not commenting. This article gave me the impression that the IPCC knows a lot about science and we should listen to what they have to say.

After briefly looking at a Forbes article entitled The Coming Revelation Of The 'Global Warming' Fraud Resembles The Obamacare Lie, I felt the need to look at some scholarly journals to hopefully find out what the truth is on the matter. The idea that global warming is a hoax is definitely a barrier to the idea that humans are causing global warming and climate change.

I found it interesting that several articles have been written in journals that support the Forbes article which states there is fraud behind the idea of “man-caused, catastrophic, global warming”.  In the article  The Real Case against Activist Global Warming Policy by James L. Payne, he wrote “Now there certainly is room for skepticism toward the IPCC’s positions on these topics. Indeed, even the IPCC panelists admit this. They express their findings and predictions with probabilistic language—likely, very likely, medium confidence, and so on—and never use the term certain”.  This article explains that just because we are having climate change doesn’t mean it is all caused by humans. With the question of humans causing Hurricaines, he compares deadlier hurricanes such as one in Gaveston in 1900 that caused 8,000 deaths and Florida in 1928 that killed 2500, compared to Hurricane Sandy that killed 130.

Other articles believe this is all about money, taking away affordable energy and the creation of a one world government.

Is an Intergovernmental Panel really the best source to decide what is best for the environment? The most that was offered in the first article is that “One of the co-chairs of the IPCC report, Chris Field, said he was actually optimistic that there could be actions taken to get ready for climate change, better planning for disasters, such as hurricanes or flooding, trying to breed more drought- or flood-resistant crops and much more emphasis on saving water and energy.” I don’t think this is going to prevent polar bears from drowning! These barrier articles sounded convincing to me.
Nevertheless, it is pretty obvious that pollution effects weather as we see this clearly in the northern part of the state. And there are many other concerns as far as changes in nature around the world. It is also important to not become dependent on  limited resources. This certainly isn't sustainable! I think the lesson learned here is to look at many viable sources and then decide where to take a stand. This seems to be a much more complicated subject then I would have guessed. There are some great examples such as in Denmark as far as alternate energy sources and minimal pollution. I do believe we should be responsible with the planet! We also need to use caution when it comes to government and spending apparently.