Beyond 2012: Why the World Won't End

        There are few who have not heard that this Friday, December 21^st, 2012, the world is supposedly coming to an end. However, NASA argues that December 21, 2012, will not be the end of the world as we know it; instead, it will be another winter solstice. In a question and answer format, NASA explains the origin of the theories behind the end of the world, and proves why it will not end. NASA refutes many of the proposed explanations for the causes of the end of the world. As mentioned, the author of this article is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an agency of the United States government that is responsible for the civilian space program and for aeronautics and aerospace research. NASA was prompted to write this article in response to the uproar concerning the end of the world as we know it. Therefore, NASA’s purpose in writing this article is to present a scientific approach to explain not only why the world is NOT ending this Friday, but also to answer frequently asked questions to help settle people’s nerves about this upcoming event. Therefore, it is only logical that the audience for this article is anyone concerned about the world ending.

            There are several rhetorical devices used in this article to help achieve the purpose of convincing society that the world is not going to end this Friday. The most prominent device used is logos. In response to every question proposed, NASA used scientific reasoning to fully respond to all questions. This logical appeal pulls people away from the Mayan myth and towards logical and factual science. I personally think it is a lot easier to believe science than it is an ancient calendar. The author also incorporates concrete language to assist the use of logos. Concrete Language is language that describes specific, observable things, people, or places, rather than ideas or qualities. As described above, NASA used specific, observable facts to present their argument that the word is not ending, rather than abstract ideas like those backing up the Mayan Calendar claim. Another subtle rhetorical device that assisted the reader’s understanding, in my opinion, was the minimal use of scientific jargon. If the author were to throw dozens of scientific terms into the article it would have become confusing and distant. However, with the minimal jargon, readers were able to follow along with minimal difficulty.

            Overall, I do believe NASA accomplished their purpose of presenting scientific reasoning to explain why the world is not ending on December 21^st, 2012. By using an argumentative style and the various rhetorical devices listed above, NASA was able to prove their point and convince the public that the world will continue to exist like it has for 4 billion years. Also, I would argue that just because this article is written by NASA, it makes it more reliable and convincing than others. So do not start blowing all of your money quite yet, there is still hope!