Enzo is writing a research paper about climate change. One of his sources is a blog post by a tourist who visited the Arctic Circle for a few weeks in the winter and felt the temperature was warm.
Which descriptions best characterize this source? Select three options
opinion
not credible
primary
neutral information
reasoned judgment
The correct answer and explanation is:
The three best descriptions for this source are:
- Opinion
- Not credible
- Primary
Explanation:
This blog post is primarily an opinion because it reflects the subjective experience of a single individual, the tourist, rather than an objective, scientifically grounded analysis. The tourist’s perception of “warm” may be influenced by personal factors such as their baseline understanding of temperature or their location before visiting the Arctic Circle. It lacks the empirical data and analysis that would be expected in a more rigorous source.
The source is also not credible for a research paper about climate change because it does not provide factual or scientifically validated data. Climate change research relies on systematic studies, expert analysis, and long-term observations, whereas this blog post provides anecdotal evidence from a short-term, personal experience. The tourist’s impression of warmth does not account for broader climatic trends or measurements that can support or refute claims about climate change.
Finally, this blog post is a primary source in that it directly reports the experience of the individual who visited the Arctic. Primary sources are firsthand accounts of an event or experience, and in this case, the blog represents the tourist’s direct observations. However, even though it is a primary source, it is not a reliable one for drawing conclusions about climate change, given that it does not present objective data or broader trends.
Therefore, while it serves as a primary source, its lack of scientific rigor makes it unsuitable for serious climate change research.