In a concerned tone, Margaret Callinan rejects the Adani coal mine project on the grounds that it will jeopardise Australia's future social and environmental prosperity. She bases her argument on the notion of human survival and the conservation of nature, as she envisages a planet with no basic needs such as "precious little clean water and "clean air." Such appeals to readers' innate survival instincts magnifies the issue into one that is beyond a mere political or economic affair, and thus, Callinan seeks to alarm readers with how relevant the issue is to them. Callinan heightens this effect by forecasting a frightening future where "the rest of us" are "left struggling to survive", painting a spine-chilling image of a society divided into a social hierarchy where coal mine workers prosper in their influx of money and the innocent common people are left to scour for food and water in the remnants of a dying earth. This pessimistic outlook is designed to unsettle readers, and to subsequently mobilise them to campaign against the building of the mine for the sake of their children's and grandchildren's wellbeing. Callinan concedes that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush", in order to demonstrate that she recognises the financial concerns of the politicians and mine workers. However, the idiom and rhetorical question "But is it really worth having a job at the Adani mine?" adds to the readers' doubts as to the integrity and validity of financial gain from working at the mine, when so many lives risk becoming tainted as a result. By concluding her argument with the same idiom, Callinan emphasises the ubiquitous threat that the coal mine project poses, as she bluntly states that even the "birds in the bush", which symbolise the workers' children and readers, will become "dead to boot." The brusque conclusion adds a sense of decisiveness to Callinan's argument, but also conjures an image of a bleak, lifeless future for the planet should the coal mine project proceed. Consequently, readers are manoeuvred to disapprove of the plan as they are left with the resounding impression that building the Adani coal mine will only destroy Australia.
Angela Gill shares Calliman's belief that the Adani coal mine plan is a threat to Australia's society and environment. However, she targets the Labor Government, arguing in a condemnatory tone that politicians are skirting their "moral responsibility" by endorsing the project. Gill's main tactic is her attack at avaricious politicians, as she establishes from the outset that they have committed a "crime against humanity." Here, her allusion to international human rights legislation widens the context of the politicians' sins to a global one, in the same way that Calligan draws upon humans' rights to clean air and water. Likewise, readers may view the Adani coal mine project itself as corrupt and a breach of humans' basic rights. The appeals to their sense of moral justice may impel them to denounce the coal mine for its unethical nature and its sinister motives. Gill augments her argument by relentlessly degrading Bill Shorten for allowing his egoism to take precedence over Australia's welfare, as she claims that he was driven by the desire to "win the next election." Such portrayal of calculating reason, compounded by the fact that Gill was actually once a Labor voter, adds credibility to Gill's argument and seeks to discredit any belief in readers' minds that the politician had acted out of Australia's interests. In fact, when viewed in tow with Calliman's letter, which portrays Adani coal mine workers as overly self-concerned, readers may come to realise that the coal mine will only ruthlessly appease the money-hungry people of this country. In effect, this seeks to evoke readers' repulsion at the immorality of Australia's leaders and workers, and to generate an outcry against the plan for the good of the common Australian.
In an ominous tone, Pope's cartoon echoes Calliman and Gill's views that building the Adani coal mine will leave the environment in irreparable ruins. To sway readers to share his view, Pope relies primarily on his haunting depiction of the Great Barrier Reef which, in its unnatural colours, reinforces Calliman's fear of losing "precious little clean water." Specifically, the speech bubble "Did I hear what?" draws readers' attention towards Pope's allusion to Edvard Munch's renowned painting "The Scream"; this, coupled with the disturbing mix of abnormal colours in the water, illustrates that unspeakable cruelty of Adani coal mine supporters and implies that nature has suffered excruciating pain wrought by such vile humans. Hence, Pope suggests that any frantic attempt from the Adani coal mine stakeholders to bury their sins will not reverse the permanent damage that has already been done. Furthermore, Pope's cartoon reflects Calliman's view that the cost of the mine will spread to all corners of Australia, as it portrays the Adani coal mine submarine puffing smoke that frames the entire cartoon. With this confrontational idea in mind, readers may feel horror at the extent politicians and workers would go to satisfy their own immediate concerns, manoeuvring them to downright condemn the wickedly portrayed participants of the coal mine project.