Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 1

Bethel Etta, Marti Green, Connor Maples, Phil Reiter

ENGL 297
Professor Szczepaniec-Bialas
April 26, 2017

Ethnographic Report

Introduction
Climate change has become one of the most controversial topics of the 21st century. The
spectrum of opinions vastly ranges based on numerous cultural, personal, and ideological
reasons. From individuals who deny the existence of climate change altogether to those who are
actively trying to make a positive difference in curbing its causes and effects, to everyone in
between, humanity sees this issue from a multitude of viewpoints. In the field of environmental
science, it is important for scientists not to make value judgements on the actions people should
and shouldnt do, but rather simply presents the facts of their research and allow people to make
their own moral decisions based on their own conclusions. In this report, we hope to develop our
understanding of the problems and solutions of climate change activists and identify ways in
which we can combat climate change denial through inclusive and effective technical
communication. We want to answer a vital question in todays American political and social
society: How can we, and other supporters of science and scientific policy, apply skills of
technical communication to positively contribute to discussions of climate change?

This study will analyze the types of technical writing in the realm of environmental science and
policy. As any form of scientific writing may include complex interpretation, our study will focus
on ways in which scientists communicate their information to be understood in a way that is both
articulate and objective. Questions about effective communication with students, colleagues,
politicians, and the general public will be posed to find solutions for a cleaner, healthier climate
in the future.

Research Location & Subject

Dr. David Lea is currently a professor at University of California, Santa Barbara in the
Department of Earth Science and is also an affiliate faculty member in the Bren School of
Environmental Science and Management. He has been a faculty member at UCSB since 1989
and has a B.S. in Geology and a PhD in Oceanography. He specializes in Paleoclimatology,
Paleoceanography, Marine Geochemistry, and Global Climate Change, and has also published
more than 100 scholarly papers on Ice Age Climate Change, Marine Geochemistry/Carbon
Cycle, and Global Climate Change. He was also selected to be a science advisor to the U.S.
Department of State to Climate Change negotiator Todd Stern, President Obamas Special Envoy
on Climate Change (SECC), and to the Office of Global Change (OGC). In determining who the
subject for our ethnographic report would be, we wanted to find someone who would embody all
of our interests in climate change, public policy, and government. Phil thought of Dr. Lea, who
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 2

was a guest speaker in his energy and environmental policy class. Dr. Leas qualifications and
diverse background represented exactly what we were interested in studying and understanding.

Our subject resides in California, so we conducted our interview with him over Google
Hangouts. Because his university was on spring break at the time of the interview, Dr. Lea spoke
to us from his home office. As we observed his modern yet traditional California residence,
decorated with artifacts such as a globe on a shelf behind him, symbolically representing his
research in global environmental science, he graciously described his work and ideologies in his
professional field. His Hawaiian shirt and sleek silver glasses gave us an informative impression
that correlated positively both with his stories and his self-description: a climatologist who bikes
ten to twelve miles to work every day.

Data Collection Methods

Interview
The majority of the information we collected for this report came from the interview we had with
Dr. Lea. Our video call interview was focused on his perspective on addressing the controversy
that is inherent in his field. By not recording the interview, the discussion was more
conversational and allowed Dr. Lea to be frank about his opinions, viewpoints, and work. For
roughly two hours we discussed many aspects of technical writing that he encounters through his
roles as a professor, researcher, and policy advisor, as well as climate change in general. As a
group we chose to funnel our questions so that he could gradually introduce us to his view of
technical writing in his field. The discussion began with Dr. Lea talking broadly about climate
change in the public and in his field and progressed to him speaking more about his perspective
on the place ethics had in science and set a casual tone that continued throughout the interview.
While the interview was somewhat informal, Dr. Lea was very organized in structuring his
explanations of writing styles and forms, and ways in which he confronts conflicts in
communicating climate information to various audiences. This method of data collection allowed
us to gain an in-depth understanding of issues within this field from the perspective of multiple
forms of writing corresponding with his multiple roles.

Scholarly Articles
Dr. David Lea has published numerous scholarly articles pertaining to climate change. His
specialty being in oceanography, Dr. Lea oftentimes studies and analyzes the geochemistry of the
ocean as well as the paleontology for his research. There are three main identifiers that classify
scholarly articles: abstracts, scientific or professional writing, a dependance on numerical data,
and graphs and visuals. One of the articles that he published in science magazine looks at
magnesium and calcium data from plankton fossils in pacific sediment to analyze what the
temperature of the ocean was like in the past. He compares the past ocean temperatures with
present ocean temperatures in an attempt to make conclusions pertaining to climate change. The
graph below displays the type of data that Dr. Lea communicates in a scholarly setting. He
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 3

frequently uses graphs like this to visually display his data clearly and concisely. Graphs display
data with simple metrics and provide clear explanations for the findings of experiments and
studies.

The flesh of the scholarly article contains lots of specific and complicated scientific data.
Scholarly articles have to correctly make all of the important points of the study, while
maintaining a concise and straightforward level of communication. This excerpt from the article
describes how they calibrated ocean temperatures with Mg/Ca concentrations, Several
planktonic species have been calibrated for Mg uptake using core-tops and culturing (11, 1315).
These calibrations indicate that the Mg content of foraminifera shells is an exponential function
of temperature with an increase of 9 1% in Mg/Ca per C. The level of detail that scholarly
articles require is immense, and Dr. Lea stressed how important brevity is, so it can be a
challenge to balance these two factors. This specific sentence begins with a relatively simple
description of where the planktonic species information came from, ending with a detailed metric
describing the increase of Mg/Ca concentrations with temperature. The ability to communicate
data in the most efficient manner possible is critical to Dr. Leas job.

Transcript
The final data collection method was a transcript of a Congressional subcommittee hearing. In
the interview our informant discussed an experience he had advising Todd Stern, an Obama
administration climate change envoy, who was testifying before the subcommittee of on Foreign
Affairs. The hearing focused on foreign relations between countries, specifically climate change
adaptation and mitigation efforts and proposals. Dr. Lea provided an insightful anecdote
revealing key insights from interactions between climate scientists and supporters, and skeptics
and deniers. Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-California) presided over the hearing. His line
of questioning began with statements on the United States proposed fiscal commitment to
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 4

climate change action, in general and compared to other nations. From this story our group
developed a comprehension of the application of the genre Dr. Lea used as a policy advisor, and
the ensuing exchange brought great clarity to how climate change is discussed and viewed in the
political arena. By understanding how he used this information and guideline to shape his work,
we can have a greater influence on the audiences we encounter.

Results
Scholarly
When he writes papers and articles for journals, Dr. Lea uses this genre to document his
experiments, discoveries, and analyses. This type of writing requires highly technical language,
with graphs and information understandable to the select few with similar experience and
knowledge. Dr. Lea tries to craft these documents to be understood as simply as possible. He
referenced an Isaac Babble quote to explain how he understands his work: writing does not end
when you write the last word, it ends when you delete the last word. He writes papers that
directly state what he discovered in his experiments and how he discovered it, while also
including all relevant methods and criteria that justify and validate his work. This genre enables a
higher-level of understanding of scientific conclusions because they can follow the research from
the very beginning, starting with the research question, to the analysis of the experimentation and
its findings, to the very end with its conclusion. Scholarly writing creates a transparency in its
conclusions that validates its presentation of facts.

A significant part of scholarly writing is jargon; words and concepts that are commonly
understood by members of the same professional field but not common to those outside of their
field. Jargon assists individuals within communicative factions to understand and accurately
describe the information in question, It supports the material being relayed by allowing for more
concision. Scientists do not have to explain a general use concept that is used in experiments
because the audience already understands it. Dr. Lea impressed on us this concept. Knowing our
audience allows us to make a deeper impact on them and could motivate them to be more
invested in climate change policy.

Professor
As a professor, Dr. Lea is a critic. He reviews papers written by students, articles written by other
professors and scientists, and at times reviews the performance of fellow professors, as teachers
and as researchers. In this genre his commentary must be constructive. Students will never learn
if their professors comments are demeaning and negative, pointing out only flaws instead of
solutions. Professors will become defensive and offended if he critiques their performance in a
negative manner. The solution is simple: highlight positive and negative characteristics at
reasonable proportion. When a colleague is happy and uplifted by kind words they are more
willing to contemplate and accept criticisms and solutions to flaws.
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 5

Constructive criticism is paramount when Dr. Lea is reviewing his students or his peers. He has
to present the flaws that he sees in a honest and fair way while also offering solutions to the
issues that he sees without condescension. This is a type of writing that can become highly
technical because being unoffensive is one of the biggest goals. Everyone receives and perceives
critique differently. Depending on who Dr. Lea is reviewing there will be differences in the tone
of his review. Reviewing a students assignments will most likely have a didactic tone but if he is
reviewing someones performance, student or peer, he has to use a more flattering tone. The most
important takeaway from this genre is being able to effectively use constructive criticism to
address the opposition to progressive climate change policy.

Teacher
The third genre employed by our informant is not often technical. As a lecturer, Dr Lea must
understand that in order to truly penetrate the minds of his collegiate audience he must present
information in a simple and straight-forward way. Some professors stress every minute detail of
a course and struggle to communicate the most important concepts effectively. Dr. Lea wants his
students to thoroughly understand a number of topics by the end of his class. These idea swill be
branded into their memory and way of thinking. Attempting to communicate every detail is
irrational and maybe even impossible for the material Dr. Lea teaches. It is more beneficial that
he presents a smaller set of concepts that are critical to their comprehension of the material.
Looking at this genre shows us that simplicity is key in appealing to an unknowledgeable
audience. The key is to make the information palatable instead of overwhelming when trying to
impart lasting understanding of complex topics.

Policy Advising
The fourth and final genre Dr. Lea has employed as a climatologist is policy advising. He
described the genre as a mix between the first and third: writing scholarly articles and teaching.
The small genre system Dr. Lea recognised and used improved his ability to succeed in this
position. The politicians he advised were intelligent individuals, yet had no basis in the scientific
literature or study in which Dr. Lea dedicated himself for nearly 30 years. The information
needed to be intelligent and scientific, but not numerical or foreign. Dr. Leas job was to distill
scientific information into policy relevant facts. Mr. Stern first asked him to prep any scientific
topic that could arise in a personal or professional setting. Mr. Stern needed to be a poised and
intelligent figure, and defend the vast array of topics and subjects encompassed in the
environment debate.

Dr. Lea first skimmed through scientific journals, picked the topics he thought most important,
and summarized those articles into one page memos. After some time he realized that anyone
questioning Mr. Stern would not be looking at these journals, but at newspapers or news articles.
So Dr. Lea began to browse the Washington Post and New York Times for topics to find
corresponding scientific articles, and create memos accordingly.
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 6

The most important aspect of Dr. Leas work, in his own point of view, was ensuring the
information he collected and condensed was unbiased. His role was to advise, not to lead,
legislate, negotiate, or convince. As a scientist he needed to present the facts as they were and let
those in charge of decision making and policy creation decide on the specifics and necessities.
Voters elect politicians to represent their voices, and those politicians must work to fairly
embody their views and beliefs. Many scientists are strong and boisterous advocates for
environmental sustainability and climate change adaption and mitigation. Dr. Lea argued in our
interview that it is not the place of scientists to make decisions: they do not have a higher power
or authority simply because of their occupation. Scientists put to provide clarity and facts for the
decisions that need to be made. However, in his time as an advisor, he witnessed conversations
on a very important political level that were astonishing, and sadly, somewhat expected. The
exchange between the afore mentioned Mr. Stern and Rep. Rohrabacher ended somewhat
intuitively:

Mr Rohrabacher: Obviously from my opening statement and from things that we

have been through before, I am highly skeptical of the global warming theory -- not the
global warming, the man-made global warming theory we also know that nature
causes this That is that rainforests and the rotting wood and the insects in rainforests
produce an enormous amount of greenhouse gases we also know that older trees are
actually part of the problem as compared to part of the solution, where younger trees, by
the theory, are sucking in this pollution and bringing out oxygen Is there some thought
being given to subsidizing the clearing of rainforests in order to--for some countries, in
order to eliminate that production of greenhouse gases which is huge? Or, would the
people be supportive of cutting down older trees in order to plant younger trees as a
means to prevent this disaster from happening?
Mr. Stern: Well, what I can say about that, Mr. Chairman I have seen different
numbers sort of ranging from 15 to 20 percent of the total amount of CO2 emitted. That
mostly comes from cutting trees down.
Mr. Rohrabacher: It is rotting wood.
Mr. Stern. Well, it may be--that may be the case. And there may be steps--I am not
expert on that--with respect to clearing out such rot, but I think the fundamental objective
and fundamental action that can be taken to reduce emissions from forests is too slow and
ultimately stop deforestation in----
Mr. Rohrabacher: Even though that is contributing to the overall level of CO2?
Mr. Stern: No, no, no. the main point is to reduce the level of--the deforestation is
the biggest driver of CO2 coming from forests, and it comes from fundamentally three,
the three large forest bases in the world, which are the Amazon, the Congo Basin, and
then in Indonesia.
Mr. Rohrabacher: So deforestation and not natural occurrence of rotting wood in
rainforests and bugs that give off these greenhouse gases; it is human-kind again?
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 7

Mr. Stern: No, no. Look, I am certain that there are natural cycles and natural
development.
Mr. Rohrabacher: ... perhaps 90 percent, of all greenhouse gases are generated by
nature itself. There is no scientific fight on that, okay. So if 80-90 percent are Mother
Nature's products, and you said that we are going to have this fund of $100 billion, part of
which will go to tackling some natural calamities which are--I mean sea raising up, et
cetera, are we going to use that fund as well to restrain natural sources of greenhouse
gases, for example older trees being planted by--being changed to younger trees and the
clearing away of the rotting wood in rainforests?

Dr. Lea had been prepping Mr Stern extensively, and the scientific, if it can be described as such,
exchange was a conversation about the adverse effects of trees on the climate. Dr Leas self-
pronounced role as an honest broker, a nonpartisan mediator of factual truths, became
unnecessary when it should have been most accepted. How can the work of the scientific
community be used and administered on the federal level when politicians lack the trust and
understanding necessary to successfully implement truth and fact-driven policies?

Analysis
The main question surrounding genres is what is their primary purpose and what do they want to
achieve. In the simplest form, scientific communication, whether scholarly, policy-related, or
academic, is meant to inform. Scientific communication studies facts and evidence. It
manipulates elements, both chemical and other, of the scientific field within the boundaries of
logic and data and hypothesizes accordingly. Science cannot change from this form. We must
change around it. The culture of vilifying the scientific community threatens that which justifies,
understands, and interprets the world around us, what we can and cannot see, what we want to
know and what we need to know.

Dr. Leas opening statements in the interview were an overview of his belief that scientists are
not responsible for the ethical guidelines of the world. Scientists are able to advise, teach, and
inform, but ultimately are only responsible for their own individual ethical decision making.
Understanding moral judgements as an individual responsibility, Dr. Lea feels scientists, a
minority profession, have no place in making such serious value judgments for large populations
of individuals. As surveyors and conveyors of science, scientists should be present in public
forums only to present and explain data and possibly guide the conversation. The resulting
judgement calls are not a scientists responsibility. Scientists are part of a demographic that is not
representative of the worlds people. Since culture and indoctrination are a large factor in an
individuals value judgements, a scientist who does not share their experiences should not
automatically have preference to make such engrossing and influential political decisions for all
people.
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 8

Sometimes, when the information that science produces is not what people want to hear, science
becomes a field to question, rather than a field solidified on the basis of fact. Science cannot be a
debatable field. Evidence and facts cannot be debatable. Findings, applications, and meanings
can be debated, but not the truth on which they are based. No climate denier questions, to the
same extent, the doctor that prescribes their treatment, or the engineers who built their house and
their cars, or the chefs who cook their meals. Yet the climatologists who advise and warn about
the anthropocentric harm in the environment are believed to be biased, misinformed, and
politically and maliciously motivated.

Our informant provided in-depth analysis of the inner workings and communication types of a
climatologist. We now can develop an understanding of the relationship between science and
people, on which we can rely on to ground our discussion and communication of environmental
science. From this basis, we understand that rhetoric does not matter, action matters. The most
articulated and inspiring speaker is only as successful as the actions that follows his or her
words. Scientists have been talking about and studying climate change for 40 years. Their voices
have mostly gone unnoticed, as have the growing problems against our environment.
Communication must become a prerequisite for action. Speeches and policy and encouraging
flyers and every type of communication meant to spark environmental movement must be a first
step, not the only step.

Data Driven Decisions

A key point made during the interview was the importance of data driven decision making in
modern society. With humanitys extensive network of knowledge and resources, we are now
able to make decisions that we never could have made in the past. Vaccines, antibiotics, and
surgeries can preemptively prevent genetic defects. Factual evidence as the basis of arguments
and decisions can only improve our way of life. People in general are complex beings that cannot
be expressed purely numerically. However, some choices and fields of policy would be greatly
improved by data driven analysis and decisions. Policy work, and all forms of communication in
the federal government and legislature, should have a strong foundation in empirical and factual
evidence. Data Driven decision making can be employed to avoid partisan, political, and
ignorant bias. It can eliminate human error in situations where purely look at facts can lead to a
simple solution. These decisions are based on a scientific genre of writing, to include evidence
through data and experimentation. Data driven decisions are dependent on a technical level
writing that critically examines the validity of theories and hypothesis through numerical data.
This method of technical communication that employs concrete evidence and findings is an
extremely useful tool for decision-making.

Policy vs Innovation
The biggest issue facing environmentalists today is how climate change adaptation and
mitigation will develop: publicly or privately. Will governments in the United States and around
the world act on the proof of the need for climate action, or will big businesses and corporations
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 9

take the lead and develop firm sustainability? The importance of this question probably lies in
how and where public support and efforts should be directed. The difficulty of public entities
passing meaningful legislation towards combating the climate deterioration logically leads
individuals to believe that the private sector is the best option for environmental success.
However, businesses have one focus: selling their product or service. Corporations are generally
machines of profit, not of public service. Many have taken steps to improve sustainability, but
most often, unless it work towards the goal of the company, these policies are unlikely to happen.
It is possible, maybe even probable, that one day sustainable solutions become the norm and
preferred choice of businesses, but action should begin today. Governments are in the position to
have the greatest capacity to fight for our planet: their power and reach is unmatched in the
private sector. Though often in our political landscape politicians are driven by corporate donors
or ideological fallacies, not what is in the best interest of the planet. The federal and state
governments, specifically in the United States, would be the prime location for sustainable
growth. While we work to change the tide of congressional inaction, innovation and business
policies are the best alternative, and the best way to get around the bureaucracy.

People vs Data
When climate change has been discussed in any public forum, activism and social action by
those who are unconvinced are not sparked by data. Individuals see images of polar bears on
melting ice, hear stories of the earth destroyed beneath the feet of their grandchildren, and read
scientific articles proving rising global temperatures, ocean acidification, and the unimaginable
effects climate change will have in the future. Yet people are the driving motivation for change.
Individuals who ignite conflict and resist and yell and fight are the ones behind whom the public
can rally. If the only artifact used to motivate people was a bar graph of scientific data, no one
will be inspired to act. If a person instead, were to stand in front of a crowd decrying Scott Pruitt
and Donald Trump and Fox News with name calling and aggressive rhetoric, he or she would be
lifted to a higher level of morality, revered as a hero of the planet. This is because rhetoric has
the power to influence actions. The genre determines the type of technical communication
needed to reach and influence the audience. While Dr. Lea mentioned that rhetoric isnt as
important as actions he also noted that the general public reacts based on the drama they see.
This means that rhetoric does have a direct connection with action and technical communicators
can use what attracts their audience to further invest them in climate change policy.

Implications of Genres
How can we use this information to formulate a successful campaign for climate change action?
How can technical communication to positively shape discussions of climate change? One
method is through calculated rhetoric to specific audiences so that progress may be made on
different fronts. While politicians are being convinced to implement policies, grassroots efforts
may be used to sway the masses of undecided citizens, or those in denial. It is important that
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 10

communication between technical communicators and each audience happens simultaneously.

They are all interconnected, and all audiences be addressed in order for all three to change.

Climate Change Believers (Scholars and Supporters)

The academic community includes a range of different participants such as students, professors,
and researchers. This audience is likely to lean more on the side that believes in climate change
as they are the people who research the effects. Their knowledge and continuous examination on
the subject allows for the creation of new and innovative methods to not only disseminate further
information, but also to reduce harmful effects of climate change. As Dr. Lea noted in our
interview, it is difficult to persuade people to care more about climate change if it creates an
inconvenience. He emphasized that a strong method to combat this kind of apathy is through
innovation, which of course, would be inspired from research. Innovative and efficient methods
to reduce human contributions to environmental deterioration that requires the least amount of
effort would greatly impact the way in which people would respond to climate change concerns
because they would be more effectively persuaded to act. Research inspires innovation and
innovation fuels convenience. Therefore, climate change scholars can positively contribute to
creating change by formulating methods to facilitate simpler lifestyle changes for everyday
people.

Government Officials (Elected and Appointed)

There are too many instances where the viewpoints and stances of politicians are based on
factors other than scientific facts and what is best for their constituents and members of the
American community. As technical communicators, we must understand that there a vast number
of motives, ideologies, and cultural influences decisions, and we cannot assume every elected
officials has malicious intent towards the nation and the planet. American ideas and beliefs are as
diverse as Americans themselves, and to disregard entire factions of the country and those who
represent them is illogical, and even un-American by definition. To convince policymakers, we
must apply two arguments in our communication: data driven decision making and the power of
innovation. If a representative has evidence that sustainable policies are beneficial in every of
most aspects, and there is public support from a diverse pool of his constituents, then supporting
that policy will and must become the norm. Data are facts. It has no partisan spin. It has no
agenda. Data based policies have objectively advantageous qualities, and convincing government
officials to implement them will, if successful, promote social and environmental benefits.

Unconvinced (Indifferent and Deniers)

Martis grandfather is progressive and subscribes to liberal politics, yet he denies both global
warming and climate change because of record high temperatures from his childhood. Growing
up on a farm meant that weather and climate were very important things to keep track of and
because at that time those records werent heralded as the end of days, her grandfather does not
believe that these new records are something to be afraid of.
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 11

Those that are either indifferent to or in denial of climate change make up a diverse and unique
audience. This group is mostly made up of people who are less likely to change their habits.
Even if someone can understand the concept of climate change they may still be indifferent to
the larger effects and implications because they are not being directly affected by the changes.
Individuals in denial are heavily influenced by rhetoric that solidifies their beliefs. This is
because there is strong empirical evidence that goes against their position. While they, like those
who are indifferent, are less likely to change their habits, they have a personal stake in being
anti-climate change. This stake can be a combination of their life experiences, culture, religion,
socio-economic status, or other ideologies. Some people who are poised to believe in climate
change based on their partisan beliefs may be deniers because their life experiences seem to
contradict the facts.

During our interview, Dr. Lea mentioned that he felt rhetoric was not as important as actions.
This is because at times, words cannot measure up to actual policy changes. This does not mean
that rhetoric is not an effective way to influence a specific group. Dr. Lea also brought up how he
feels that most people are influenced by the drama and politics instead of facts. If there is a
report that comes out about some large corporation was lying about their environmentally
detrimental practices, the general public is more likely to respond and be receptive. Whereas, if a
report came out about how environmentally detrimental some daily practices of the general
public are, people are less likely to change their habits. We have stated that many positive
innovations benefit both the public and the environment which should be cause enough to
convert those that are indifferent to believers but again, changing habits is difficult. In our
interview, Dr. Lea noted that people will generally follow the most convenient path even if it is
not the most environmentally friendly because the alternative may cause them some discomfort
because of the change in their routine. Ultimately, both rhetoric and innovations targeting this
group of people has to be convenient for them to consume and act on.

Conclusion
The different forms of writing that Dr. Lea has produced in the environmental science field,
which included academic writing, research publications, and the governmental scientific
advising, creates an enticing and immersing understanding of a very difficult and nebulous
subject. There are definitely biases and avenues for further study and research. Dr. Leas
perspectives are only his own, and not representative of the entire environmental science
community. However, his views on climate change and its effects are an ideal model of the ways
in which climate change should be addressed.
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 12

Works Cited

David Lea. Earth Science - UC Santa Barbara, The Regents of the University of California,
www.geol.ucsb.edu/people/david-lea. Accessed 17 Apr. 2017.

Hansen, J. et al. "Global Temperature Change". Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences 103.39 (2006): 14288-14293. Web. 24 Apr. 2017.

Lea, D. W. "Climate Impact Of Late Quaternary Equatorial Pacific Sea Surface Temperature
Variations". Science 289.5485 (2000): 1719-1724. Web. 24 Apr. 2017.

Interview with David Lea. Interview. 30 March 2017.

UN Climate Talks and Power Politics: Its Not about the Temperature. Archives. US House of
Representatives Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. 25 May 2011.
Web. 17 April 2017. Transcript.

Johnson-Eilola, Johndan, and Stuart A. Selber. What Do Technical Communicators Need to

Know about Genre?. Solving Problems in Technical Communication. Chicago: U of Chicago
Press, 337-361. Print.
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 13

Introduction
1. BE-w,r PR-r
2. BE-w,r PR-r
Research Location and Subject
1. MG-w, BE-r
2. MG-w, BE-r
Data Collection Methods
1. Interview: BE-w,R
2. Scholarly Articles:
a. CM-w PR-R
b. CM-w PR-R
3. Transcript: PR-w BE-r
Results
1. Scholarly
a. PR-w, BE-r, MG-w,R
b. MG-w,R
2. Professor
a. PR-w,r, MG-w,R
b. PR-w,r, MG-w,R
3. Teacher: PR-w,r, MG-r
4. Policy Advisor
a. PR-w
b. PR-w
c. PR-w,r
d. PR-w,r
Analysis
 Etta, Green, Maples, Reiter, 14

1.MG-w,r
2.BE-r MG-r PR-w,r
3.BE-r MG-r PR-w,r
4.Data Driven Decisions: PR-w,r BE-r MG-r
5.Policy vs Innovation: PR-w,r BE-r MG-R
6.People vs Data: PR-w,r BE-r MG-R
Implication ofGenres
1.PR-w
2.Supporters of Climate Change: BE-w, MG-r PR-r
3.Government Officials: PR-w,r BE-r MG-r
4.Unconvinced:
a. MG-w,r PR-R BE-R
b. MG-w,r PR-R BE-R
c. MG-w,r PR-R BE-R
Conclusion: BE-w, PR-r