In the article, Rachel lays down an extensive collection of facts regarding pesticides and still succeeds in relating each scientific fact and explanations to one another such that they lead to another argument. Initially, Rachel gives an explanation on the harmful effects of pesticides on the environment, she then explains why it there is no need of using pesticides and finally proves wrong the notion that, pesticide use is a necessity in maintenance of farm production. Her argument kicks starts with scientific facts where she explains that pesticides contain some chemicals, which cause environmental pollution and cause irreversible damages on living creatures. She claims pesticides are evil pollutant so that the audience can get a negative perception of them. The audience is therefore able to understand that pesticides cause more harm than good, making them question whether there is a need for the use of pesticides. Rachel goes on to answer this question by referring back to the principle of natural selection by Charles Darwin. She argues that, with pests possessing the capability of evolving, this necessitates constant creation of new pesticides. With this information, she argues that it is unnecessary to keep developing new pesticides to deal with the pests’ problem. Afterwards, Rachel changes her tone to address the real problem of crop production; she views overproduction as the main problem. She explains that the surplus of cross has caused U.S citizens to pay over a billion dollars
to cover for the cost of crop production.