Final answer:
Winona LaDuke effectively argues for reducing light pollution by highlighting non-astronomical impacts such as disrupting animal life cycles and increasing fossil fuel use.
Explanation:
Winona LaDuke effectively argues for reducing light pollution by highlighting various non-astronomical reasons that concern environmentalists and individuals worried about global warming. She emphasizes how light pollution disrupts the life cycles of animals, leads to unnecessary expenses, and contributes to the use of fossil fuels. By presenting these impacts, LaDuke makes a compelling case for addressing light pollution beyond just its astronomical effects.
Learn more about Winona LaDuke's argument for reducing light pollution here:
https://brainly.com/question/29098194
