Charles Krauthammer's 'The Myth Of Settled Science'

Climate change is one of today’s most hotly debated topic. Scientists for many decades have made supposed claims that current energy creation and reliance on fossil fuels will lead to inevitable changes to the planet. Today, climate change denial is still a popular to most of the world despite the mounds of evidence to support that it exists. The climate change issue suffers from being mismanaged by various parties through focusing on the wrong issues and the lack of true commitment from the general public, according to Sandra Steingraber.

In 2010, Al Gore wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times claiming that global warming is a matter our generation must concentrate on in order to halt the rapid increases of change to our planet’s climate. He creates a strong, convincing argument by addressing and exemplifying issues pertaining to global climate change.

On one side of the argument we have we have scientists, who recognise that climate change is present in our society today and realise the importance of direct action. They provide us with important and relevant data and statistics that are evidence that climate change is real.

Even scientists who think human activity is the main cause of climate change don't deny that natural changes will cause temperature fluctuations on Earth. However, their argument is that in the current cycle of climate change, the impact caused by man is far greater. But there’s no indication that the two sides of the climate change debate will reach any common ground in the near future on what scientific evidence is showing, or what policy decisions should be adopted.

In regards to scientific facts, Gore explains that when it comes to samples and the analyses of many articles and studies on the matter, “the number of those that disagreed with the scientific consensus that we are causing global warming and that, it is indeed a serious problem” is zero. (Gore) At first, he also uses overemphasis and exaggeration when referring to mass media and its claims that, many

Climate change has been a subject of discussion in the media for many years, supported with the use of arguments against oil polluting the environment and extreme scare tactics of Polar ice caps flooding civilians backyards. The issue has been ignored by the majority of lay people as seeming too complicated, and with all the conflicting information in the media in the past, who can blame them? However, scientifically, climate change and what perpetrates it is fairly simple to understand and society as a whole is beginning to come to a clear consensus on climate change. Thanks in part to more readily available forms of media and information, people have become cognizant of the fact that climate change is a legitimate problem which requires immediate amelioration. While this may seem melodramatic, society is realizing that climate change is an issue which can no longer be denied if the human race wishes to continue.

Beyond the emotional appeal to American greatness in solving technical problems, he presents compellingly logical and ethical arguments. He starts by calling out anyone who would ignore the threat of climate change, a blunt shot at many Republicans in Congress (26:11). The president adopts a nonchalant approach, essentially mocking anyone who isn't on board with climate science. "Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You’ll be pretty lonely," Obama says. With tremendous confidence that his logical and ethical arguments cannot be countered, he attempts to win the day by overcoming any emotional

Through looking at recorded snow fall totals, Lake Freeze overs, and agriculture impacts one is able to start seeing trends in environmental changes. By looking at record snow fall records we can get a sense of historical air temperature and see how a specific location has been warming. Lake Freeze over data also gives good indications of an average air temperature increase. But there are still many people in this world that doubt that climate change is real. Yes earth goes through different periods of time where the climate has changed drastically. Look at the Ice Age, there was a time where a huge glacier stretched all the way across Vermont and in some places that glacier was 2 miles thick. Take for example, former Texas governor Rick Perry, who is in charge of the Department of Energy stated in 2011 that, “Global warming was an unproven scientific theory.”(Sidahmed, M. (2016, December 15). To the new presidential administration the topic of climate change has been looked at as a joke or even as a false idea. What we now know with the amounts of glaciers residing and the rise in temperatures and sea levels I believe that this subject is a bigger topic than what they believe. This subject needs to be taken seriously and we as humans need to take responsibility for some of our actions that have impacted climate change. I strongly disagree with many different actions that our president has taken regarding the issue

Koonin, who was the undersecretary for science in the Energy Department, a professor of theoretical physics and provost at Caltech, a chief scientist of BP, and is currently director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University. With all those positions, Koonin appears to be a very credible proponent for delaying climate change. He argues that climate science is not settled and society should, in turn, hold off in making brash decisions. Koonin states that there are three challenges to why climate change is not settled: the climate systems variability, the poor understanding of oceans regarding climate, and the uncertainties regarding positive and negative feedback loops (2). In other words, Koonin is saying that there are many things we do not know when we predict the climate. Koonin adds that “although most [computer] models are tuned to reproduce the gross features of the Earth’s climate, the marked differences in their details and projections reflect” all the things he stated that climate science is not settled on (3). Ergo, he concludes by saying “any serious discussion of the changing climate must begin by acknowledging not only the scientific certainties but also the uncertainties, especially in projecting the future” (5). Koonin is concerned less with the certainties of climate change than with the uncertainties of climate change. This is troubling because it delays and perhaps halts the general public from agreeing towards a sensible solution in dealing with climate change. Primarily, all humans fear uncertainties -- nothing is scarier than not knowing what can happen. So if humans are scared due to the uncertainty of a situation, they hold off from making decisions which are vital to their future. Nonetheless, life is filled with uncertainties and that should not prevent society from making progress on climate change. After all, it would be wiser to

These last two election cycles have demonstrated the importance of climate change in relation to politics and the american people. What is unfortunate is that what seems to be a very crucial and real problem in our human survival, according to scientists, is being debated by people who do not have the scientific credentials to even discuss the science behind the reality of climate change. Those behind the skeptics, have funded a successful campaign against the reality of the facts and have introduce doubt into the sciences.

When we do anything, it is influenced by our past and the people around us. If we walk across the street or play a game, we are consciously or subconsciously motivated and swayed by the lessons and suggestions from people around us to walk or play a certain way. This is the same case for reading or listening to scientific concepts and theories as we try to compare and test them against what we have learned before, even if neither of them are factual or heavily supported by others. For example, when my family and I were visiting an apartment, the landlord kept talking about the benefits and advantages of Vitamin C, referencing a novel he read as a child; however, once we left the complex, my father told us that this was not completely true,

Today, we live in a dog-eat-dog, who’s better than who world. We live in a world where one person’s opinion on something is more important than another’s because they simply are more qualified. With all of the news sources and media outlets, we are left to figure out which source of information is more correct than another based on the credibility and qualifications of its author. This same problem occurs in the topic of climate change. When we look up information about climate change we must evaluate the credibility of the authors who are writing the articles we are reading. Once you are able to figure out which author is more credible the next step is to determine which author is more persuasive and able to convince the reader that their

There have been plenty of disputes regarding the infamous topic global warming, despite the fact that there is a unanimous scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change. A history professor at UCSD, Naomi Oreskes, discusses this in her article, “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change”. She begins her investigation by researching credible experts and environmental organizations, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the National Academy of Sciences, and several others. By utilizing these various sources as evidence it strengthens her argument about the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change. In this case, Oreskes audience consists of

Critically assess how the media have used the scientific evidence in the debate around the climate change, and its causes and/or effects

“All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingly dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not climate change is real. Not only is it real, it's here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster.” BARACK OBAMA, speech, Apr. 3, 2006. Climate change is not a theory contrary to what many individuals believe and is in fact confirmed by major scientific agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the United States. Global Warming causes are mainly due to greenhouse gases