Climate Change


Prior to class, my perception of the climate change debate always seemed to be against the beliefs of the policymaker versus the credibility of the scientific data. However, now I know that there are copious amounts of credible evidence proving that climate change is occurring. The true battle is between the policymakers that recognize the shocking evidence so they take action and the ones who identify there is scientific uncertainty on how big a role humans play in this phenomenon so they try to discredit it. Models are developed from an overabundance of statistical data and evidence so that we are able to predict what may occur with climate change.  The predictions have an element of scientific uncertainty because there is room for error. Politicians that are against any action towards climate change take this uncertainty and fixate themselves on it. As someone chose to do what is best for the people I believe you stay on the side of caution when events like climate change our taking place and I understand a small amount of skepticism, but neglect of scientific evidence seems puzzling to me. This problem in how climate change is being handled continues throughout the Trump Administration. Agencies in the administration are taking climate change reports and downplaying the evidence presented. For example, they consider drilling impacts on the amount of oil leasing as a minor problem. They also cover up their contributions to the problem by pointing out smaller contributors. We have the science needed to address the issue and design policy to combat the effects, but we are too polarized in our political parties to take action.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/as-trump-administration-downplays-warming-agencies-chronicle-climate-impacts/

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