Climate Change Solo Blog


Climate change needs to be discussed. I learned from class that there is enough scientific evidence to prove that climate change is real. Scientists have produced significant research to show that denying this is foolish. I am unsure about how detrimental the effects of climate change will be in the future. The media documents certain climate change activists saying we are rapidly approaching human extinction and other people saying its effects are not an extreme threat. I am wondering if there is a middle ground here, and if so, what is that argument? I also wonder how confident climate scientists feel about their conclusions. Do they think they have all of the information possible, or are they leaving the door open to hear new ideas? In other words, how comfortable do they feel making future predictions? Some potential concerns with the science is that previous predictions about climate change have not always been correct, allowing people to ask why climate change is worse now than in the past.

My initial response to climate change is that there is a great deal of awareness (at least in the community I live in) and that this awareness is good. The problem to me occurs when discussing climate change solutions. I think people lack an ability to converse effectively about this issue because it is one that charges people emotionally. Until people of all different views are able to converse about ways to implement solutions to climate change, this issue is not able to be handled correctly. Also, it is hard for the world to fight against climate change unless all countries try to help. It is far more challenging to have a significant effect in solving climate change if countries that account for a large percentage of carbon emissions disregard the issue. It takes more than just the efforts of the United States in order to help the changing climate. We need to open up informed debates on ways to help the environment. I am interested in learning about different ways that help to solve the issue of a changing climate. The outside source I read was from Scientific American and the title was “How Nuclear Power Can Stop Global Warming.” The article allowed me to learn that nuclear power can offer alternatives to emitting greenhouse gases. Its effectiveness is backed by scientific research and I think it will be involved in future policy discussions. I found it interesting and would like to conduct more research into the topic.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Group 2

Ocean acidification is important because it impacts biodiversity. A falling ph level has detrimental impacts on species that build shells or skeleton based on carbonate. For example, tropical corals. Hence ocean acidification destroys ecosystems, resulting in the ultimate disappearance of certain species. The computer generated evidence predicts that if the carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise exponentially, this will result in the drastic increase in the ocean ph level. The levels of PH are predicted to rise as much as they have in the past 300 million years in the next 1000 years. The computer models used past historical and geographical evidence to see what the natural rise would be and compared it to the rate at which ph levels are rising today. It would be difficult for nature to compensate for these damages. Consequently, resulting in further reduction on the marine biodiversity, specifically, coral reefs. Aidan Coco Grace Miske Jingyi Li Ling Zheng
Read more
Group 5: We misidentified the metal as Iron, when it is in fact Zinc. This occurred because we calculated the volume incorrectly which thereby translated to the wrong density. In addition, we observed that the metal did not melt. Our metal also fell apart onto the table which could have been a sign of possible meltage. As for our mineral, we believed that it was quartz, when it was actually Fluorite. We did not believe it had dissolved into the test tube; however, it in fact was slightly soluble. The largest error we made, which would have helped us determine correctly what the quartz and the metal were, was incorrectly calculating the density. If we would have done this part correctly, we likely would have determined the correct mystery materials.
Read more