Climate Change

This week for my environmental science class I had to take on the task of becoming a researcher. I was assigned to research some very interesting questions about Climate Change? What is climate change you ask? Well most of us know it as global warming, yet the term “global warming” is misleading as some areas of the planet are indeed warming and this is where the phrase might have been taken from, but the reality is that while some areas are warming others are in fact cooling. So you see the proper and correct term when referring to the changing weather patterns is “climate change” rather than global warming.

Now, let us talk about the controversy that surrounds climate change. Around the globe scientist are practically unanimously in accordance in their conclusion that the climate of our Earth is indeed changing. They state that findings show that humans are causing the planet harm because of our hazardous actions, mainly releasing extreme amounts of CO2 into the air. What releases CO2? Well when we burn coal, oil, and gas we create the problem. Then when you add the fact that we are destroying our forest through deforestation the problem becomes even bigger.  But not all seem to agree with these ideas, there is a very limited number of scientist (.03 % actually) that disagree with the findings of the vast majority (more than 99.7 %.). These small numbers of scientist argue that the climate is not changing. They promote their skepticism through a few institutes that they have founded. We know that their ideas are in fact adopted by some since there are average citizens, news outlets, and government officials among others who have identified themselves as skeptics. But we must ask ourselves, can 99.7% of scientist be reading the data wrong? Probably not. I also must note that the very small number (.03) of scientists, who disagree with climate change, might to some degree be moved by bias. Their institutes are funded by groups and corporations who benefit from the denial of climate change.  Many might argue that regardless of where funding come from these scientific institutes are capable of reaching unbiased results.  And though this can be true, we must also take into consideration, that if in fact they were to agree with the rest of the scientific community and state that climate change is real and present; well they probably run the risk of not receiving funding from such generous donors again.  Therefore we must educate ourselves and learn about climate change, once we have done so we can reach an informed decision regarding whether we are believers in climate change or whether we fall into the skeptics’ category.  

So let us start educating ourselves today. Following is a small lesson in Climate Change 101.

According to evidence, is the climate changing right now?

Yes. The climate of our planet is rapidly changing. Results show that climate change is real and happening so quickly that at the June 2009 just prior to the G8 Summit which took place in Italy the scientific community of the 8 member nations that were to be present along with their colleagues from other nations who were also assisting the summit urged their political leaders to “seize all opportunities” they have to address climate change. Why? They stated that climate change "is happening even faster than previously estimated."  Across the globe the weather is changing. Our summers are becoming longer and hotter. Our rainy seasons are shorter and drier, snowy areas are melting.  Sea levels are rising as glaciers are melting and record breaking paces. All around the world indicators and examples such as these are proving that climate change is happening.

What does evidence say about humans’ roles in the changing climate?

Scientific results show that since the time of the industrial revolution the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in our atmosphere have increased steadily. Today scientists track the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere by different sectors of our society. The results of these studies (just as those conducted regarding the industrial revolution) show that human activities are increasing the emissions of these gases. A recent scientific study showed that between 1990 and 2005 the increase in greenhouse gasses steady increased and rose up by 31%! Humans are also killing many of our planet’s forests. Through deforestation immense amounts of land are being cleared of its trees and this in turn harms our planet and adds to climate change. Trees help clean our air and balance our planet when we cut them down at record speeds we are bringing tremendous harm to our planet; harm that is harsh and has potentially deadly consequences for our planet and ourselves.  If we take this evidence into consideration we can logically reason that if the cause of global climate change is the increasing amounts of greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere and as we can clearly see humans through their activities (burning coal, oil, and deforestation) are releasing steadily rising amounts of these gases into the atmosphere then we can with certainty argue that these two are linked. And not only can we say are they linked but rather we can conclude that human activities are responsible for the changing climate.  

All of this information leads us to a very important question:

How is climate change likely to affect our society and our world?

The world as we know it will and is changing. Weather patterns as stated before are not constant as they once were.  Areas that were used to warm temperatures are now experiencing cooling trends, in other parts hot areas are becoming hotter, cold areas are warming, rainy seasons are shorter and precipitation levels are down. These are just some of the ways our weather will, can and is changing. But let us think beyond the mere aspect of adjusting to new weather conditions. We must also realize that our way of life and daily activities will be affected, our economies will also suffer. Farming patterns and locations will have to change and try to adapt to the changing weather. If we obtain less rain we will suffer from a water shortage that can affect not only farming but also daily aspects of our lives such as having limited amounts of drinking water. The costs of goods will rise tremendously and bring upon us unprecedented difficulties.  The list of potential harms is endless, some are small and maybe even considered insignificant to some. But others according to scientists are going to be world changing. Hurricanes, tornadoes, and overall harsher, stronger and extreme weather conditions will occur that will cause devastation to our planet, our communities, our societies, and our families.  

Now that we know what is happening to our planet and when we take into consideration that 99.7% of scientist agree on not only the existence of the problem but also on the root of it, why are some in our country still not convinced? 

First let me start but stating that around the world there is almost a unanimous agreement that Climate Change is real and needs to be addressed before it too late. It seems as if the United States is the only country where its citizens and political leaders are debating whether in fact climate change is real. Does this remind you of anything? Maybe 99.7% vs. .03%? ;) Well then why is this so? I believe this debate is raging in our country because of Capitalism. You see there are those in our country which profit in the selling of “stuff” and in order to continue making this profit they must continue to make their “stuff” in the cheapest way possible regardless of whether it harms our planet and its people. In the process they are releasing greenhouse gases through the production process or the things they produce (such as cars) produce these gases. They do not wish to curb their production (profits) and so they want the system to stay as it is.

So how have they gotten so many to buy into their reasoning? Well first they have socialized us to feel that we have the best way of life that exists around the planet. We feel that we deserve to use as many resources needed in order to live the lives that we are accustomed to even if they harm our planet. I also believe that in order to justify their actions and in order to provide us with a justification they have supported and in effect bought off certain scientific institutions so that these can help them. Institutions that receive funding from these giant companies and groups are influenced and persuaded because of the funding to reach results that are favorable to their donors. When these institutions state that climate change is false then the media especially the media that caters to these points of views spreads the message.  Many citizens of our country are not informed enough about the facts and so they are influenced and persuaded by the headlines in the news. They do not follow through in finding out for themselves instead they take “their word for it.” And accept the message as reality. But is this the only reason the problem exists? No. not only do these “skeptical scientist” argue that climate change is false; they also attack those who argue in favor of the reality of climate change. They label the work of 99.7% of the scientific population (climate change related) as junk science and perpetuate this message through various means. 

I have also learned that a breakdown in communication is also partially at fault. The scientific community is one that like many other communities has specialized words and meanings attached to these words. Well in our everyday society we also use many of these same words. So what’s the problem? They have different meanings to each other and so while they might understand their statements and arguments fully, we (regular citizens) do not. An example I found interesting was the word “manipulation.” When a scientist uses the word to him/her it means that the data was computed and results were obtained. To us when we read or hear that something was manipulated, we associate it with negative tampering. This is just one example of how communication between the scientific community and us can be and is affected due to terminology. 

So we must address these two main issues in our society if we are to get past them. We will then be able to focus on the immense problem at hand, take concrete steps toward the healing of our planet.  If we do not address the issue now in 50 years we will have very little of a planet left. If we continue as we do we will soon find ourselves fighting each other for the few resources left. It will not be where countries are fighting each other rather it will be where neighbors are fighting with their neighbors for survival. The planet I imagine will be dry and colorless our “quality of life” will be nonexistent and will resemble the hard and desperate lives that many around the world live in underprivileged countries. 

So we must ask ourselves if this is what we want. If not, then we must act now!