Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Climate change essay sciencedaily
Climate change essay sciencedaily
Climate change essay sciencedaily
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
People have never taken too kindly to being accused. It comes with the sense that a person did something so inherently wrong, it needed to be pointed out. There is an expectation for that person to fix their mistake and make up for what they did, even if it seems near impossible. And, when it comes down to it, it feels a bit overwhelming. So, when the scientific community came to a majority consensus that humanity was to blame for global climate change, it was not met with understanding, but skepticism. It exploded into controversy, becoming the center of political debates and a cop-out for mass media. Facts were thrown out the window as they became unreliable in the eyes of many Americans (Eshelem). Politicians took hold of the situation, overlooking staggering amounts of scientific data, and instead became full of excuses worrying …show more content…
All-in-all, there is not much to say about what is being done about global climate change and there will not much time left to do something. There needs to be change in the conversation. The idea that facts can be overrun by opinion and politics is a poisonous ideal that leads to serious consequences that will hurt everyone in the long run. Americans need to stand up, take responsibility, and become the leader in this change for the better.
First things first, Americans need to acknowledge that human activity is in fact the leading cause of global climate change. With thousands of research papers and studies on the subject, the amount of people who still have doubts about climate change is astounding. Every counter argument pushing the cause of climate change away from human activity has been disproved and
In the article “Climate of Complete Certainty” by Bret Stephens, he argues upon the topic that politicians exaggerate scientific certitude to benefit themselves. Stephens uses Clinton’s campaign loss and the climatic debate as illustrations to show that scientific fact doesn’t always give the defining factor of gains or losses. As stated by Stephens, Brexit showed the Clinton campaign that the populist tide causes a major surprise factor when determining the end result. With this example in mind, Stephens conveys that the end result strayed away from absolute certainty. Another instance in which scientific certitude is altered is within the topic of climate change.
Many people’s opinions are influenced by political leaders and their beliefs, which can have a negative effect on science’s efforts. Mere word changes have shown to make a difference in people’s willingness to pay for taxes that they don’t necessarily support or are even aware of. The use of storytelling has shown to be a powerful means in communicating science to the public as well. Although education and science understanding are not directly correlated with the acceptance of climate science, there is evidence that shows that a brief explanation of greenhouse effects “enhance acceptance across the political spectrum”. Researching source credibility has also boosted the political acceptance of certain scientific information.
Piers Anthony once said, “When one person makes an accusation, check to make sure that he himself is not the guilty one. Sometimes it is those whose case is weak who make the most clamour.” Everybody has been falsely accused at some time in his life. In fact, being blamed for something that one was not guilty of occurs during adulthood just as frequently as it does during childhood. False accusations are not abnormal in today’s society. Furthermore, they’ve been prevalent throughout all of history.
At both the national and international levels, the policy debate over climate change is unfolding rapidly. But it is also becoming increasingly mired in controversy, and nowhere more so than in the United States. This raises a crucial question: Why is it that this country - the undisputed leader of the world in science and technology - is finding it so difficult to agree on policies to address an ecological threat that, if it materializes, could have catastrophic consequences for itself and the rest of the world?
As referenced in Al Gores ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ 97% of the peer reviewed scientific reports regarding global warming within the scientific community, determined that global warming is an undeniable fact. The majority of the world’s population is not exposed to this scientific evidence; only the media's interpretation and distortion of the facts based on the head of their organisations
Climate change has been nothing, but controversial in the last fifty years. Climate change is a change in the average weather of a region or city. Scientists have opted to use the term "climate change" instead of global warming because as the Earth's average temperature changes, winds and ocean currents move heat around the globe in ways that can cool some areas, as well as warm others. There is an ongoing dispute about the effects of humans on the global climate and about what policies should be implemented to avoid possible undesirable effects of climate change. Ninety-seven percent of published scientific research concluded that climate change is real, problematic for the planet, and has been exacerbated by human activity. But what about the three percent that contradicts that?
For these reasons, global warming stands as one of the most daunting policy issues facing our world today. This is compounded by the debate over the very existence of climate change. While countless sources of empirical evidence testify to the very real presence of climate change the world over, considerable denial of the phenomenon still exists. The argument has been made that evidence about climate change is a gross overstatement, or in some cases, a complete fabrication. Despite the evidence to the contrary, many interest groups with considerable political clout have successfully perpetuated the argument that documented changes in the environment are a product of natural cyclical changes in climate, and are not associated with human activities. However, even the acceptance of this particular brand of reality is no grounds for the disregard of environmental consciousness. Even if one accepts the premise that recent climate change is not resultant of human activity, the rationale behind environmental conservation remains ...
Most of the scientists and journalists agree on the fact that, in a short run, climate change does not have substantially direct effects on human that can provoke public action or political pressure, compared to other climate issue like ozone damage. For instance, as Revkin puts it, “never see a headline in a major paper reading ‘Global Warming Strikes: crops wither, coasts flood, species vanish,’ all of those things may happen in plain sight in coming decades, but they will occur so dispersed in time and geography that they will not constitute news as we know it” (237). Consequently, such common perception leaves citizens an impression that climate change is not a very related issue because they do not have any information to consider it as an urgent
All facts, statements and reports conclude that mankind is in part responsible for this change in our ecosystem. Hence if we do not change, drastic changes over the next 100 years will threaten the safety of some people and our environment. More and more research is being deployed into this intriguing field of science. Some scientists deny reports of global warming impacts. And some scientists show more and more proof of such impacts. When will the academic and governmental community understand the consequences of our treasured way of life? Will it take huge catastrophic man-induced disasters to change the worlds mind on what actions to take? Is our economy so reliant upon oil that it will risk our planets' health, for money? People need to take action on these issues before the damage of global warming has left a huge, worsening-footprint on our earth.
Many people dedicate their lives to spread the message about climate change being real. Even though some change in the climate is natural, many events that have happened cannot be explained away by nature. Climate change is causing damage to the world that is completely irreversible. Nasa says, “Most scientists say it 's very likely that most of the warming since the mid-1900s is due to the burning of coal, oil and gas. Burning these fuels is how we produce most of the energy that we use every day” (nasa). The energy that we use daily makes our life easier, but it hurts the earth. Why does the government still allow us to use these things? Science has shown us that sea levels are rising in many parts of the world. Warm weather is causing glaciers to melt which results in the sea level rising. Earth 's average temperature has been rising for the last century in a half; and there has also been a steady rise in ocean temperature since 1969. It is said that climate control is man made and it is dangerous. On the other side of the argument, many people do not believe that climate change is real. They argue that their has not been a big temperature change in almost two decades. They also bring up the point of there not being enough data in the climate history to draw the conclusion of what is happening in the climate now is abnormal. Scientist started to record climate change around the 1800’s which many people believe is not enough data to do a comparison. Another reason some believe that climate change is not real is because of some instances where a scientist predicts a date of a significant climate change never happens. Rinkesh writes, “ For example:- Al Gore predicted that all Arctic ice would be gone by 2013. But, on contrary Arctic ice is up by 50% since 2012” (conserve-energy-future). Many people find that these reasons are why climate change is not
The most hot button issue in today’s global affairs is the rapid effects of climate change. Over 99% of climate scientists agree that the effects of human activity are causing the world to heat up at alarming rates. All the major nations in the world, bar the United States, have a consensus that there is a problem and we need to solve it. So what exactly is being done to combat the problem? Is the international community doing enough to limit the future problems that could arise if there are not any changes made?
...empts at doing our part. But what is really needed is change at national and global levels. Only by convincing leaders to create laws that improve our energy policy, and pushing companies to adopt sustainable business practices on a global level, can we see real change. (EDF - Environmental Defense Fund , 2015) We need laws, polices, and infringes…..etc. whatever it takes in order to get our CO2 emissions under control. There are plenty of ways to improve on the current state of global warming like limiting global warming pollution, utilizing renewable energy, drive smarter vehicles, or even drive less. However small the action any change in our normal day to day can still help tremendously especially when done by a large number of people. We have to remember that this is the only planet we have and global warming is a global issue that needs to be taken seriously.
Climate change has been an extremely controversial topic in recent history and continues to create much debate today. Many questions concerning climate change’s origins and its potential affect on the globe are not fully understood and remain unanswered. What is climate change? Is climate change happening? Is it a natural cycle of the world or are there other catalysts involved such as human activity? What proof is there? What data correlations show climate change is accelerated by humans? How serious is climate change and how will it affect the future of our globe? What are we doing to address climate change? Should we really be concerned about climate change? Questions such as these have made climate change a very serious issue in today’s world and created the ideology of climatism. The issue of climate change has affected many different aspects of our lives and the world we live in. Policymaking, human activism, technologies, emission control, global warming, alternative energy sources and many other things have been greatly affected by the mania of climate change. This research report will present climate change in a light of common sense and rationality that will take a grounded discussion of the science behind climate change, global warming, human activity, and how the ideology of climatism has corrupted and driven the actions to combat climate change.
Are you to blame for climate change, or is it just a natural cycle of the Mother Earth it self. People have been burning and cutting down trees for as long as we've been here. Many people around the world are affected by it, for example a Mt.Edgecumbe alumni Nelson Kanuk(Supreme). Nelson’s remote village of Kipnuk has been affected by climate change by erosion of the bank, melting of permafrost, and flooding because of the warm temperatures causing the ice to melt too fast. His house is in jeopardy because his house on the bank of the river, the land is eroding away.
The controversial subject of global warming according to a large amount of scientists is not a prominent concern. Over 31,000 scientists have signed on to a petition saying humans aren't causing global warming. More than 1000 scientists signed on to another report saying there is no global warming at all. There are tens of thousands of well-educated, mainstream scientists who do not agree that global warming is occurring at all. If so many scientists believe it is not a concern then why should we think any different? Well, a consensus shows that in reality 97% of all climate scientists agree that global warming is an issue and that it is most likely due to ...