Why Climate Change Failed Summary

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.

The topic I connected to Global Politics and Environmental Science is Donald Trumps opinion about climate change. Ever since Donald Trump became president, there has been a denial from him about this issue because he thinks it’s a hoax. More specifically he tweeted on November 6th 2012 saying “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive” and he also doesn’t believe climate change even exists. I agree that global warming and climate change do both exist and they also impact our environment. Global warming is the ongoing rise and change in temperature near the Earth’s surface which can also change the pattern of the climate. Climate change is happening everyday because of

As a kid who has cared about nature his entire life, and an avid modern environmentalist for four years and counting, this issue has been at the center of my psyche for quite some time. I have seen public perspective on this issue change before my eyes. From the original rejection of Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth movie on “global warming” to personally marching alongside 300,000 people in our nation's capital to raise awareness on climate change. However, despite all of these avenues the issue is still spoken about as this distant idea that eventually will be a disaster. Many politicians and news networks speak of the need for slow implementation of policies and programs to right our environmental wrongs. The best way to paraphrase the common narrative of this issue would be to say, climate change is going to happen down the road, it will probably be bad and trying to fix it in the near future would be a good idea. That weak call to action shoves climate change onto the long to-do list of the leaders of our world. Not only does it not create the urgency needed to actually curb the effects of our environmental ignorance, but it does not accurately describe the threat of a changing climate. Treating this like a political issue will not allow for the rigorous changes needed to address such a problem in the timely manner that is required.

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.

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

That is a really deep question. For this paper, I wanted to understand the climate change issue better. I wanted to understand how humans acknowledge (or even deny) climate change, still yet do nothing to remedy the problem. Most people are guilty of this. I, myself am guilty of this. As Nordhaus and Shellenberger state in their article, the problem seems to be a thing that will only be a priority once it is in our faces. Rust says that these films create an awareness that is somewhat being lost in this postmodern globalization. The Day After Tomorrow, Soylent Green, and The Mist all send a message that could get us thinking about cutting back to prevent climate change. But as my topic has illustrated, it seems a bit farfetched that change would actually

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 I polled a few of my friends about “what is the single most critical problem facing us today?” I got a frequent response that’s not so shocking, climate change. So why climate change? Why not obesity, or population control, or education? While all of those are problems that deserve discussion, no single topic is so fundamental to us as humans as climate change. In 2007 Al Gore stated in his person of the year interview that “Today we 're dumping 70 million tons of global-warming pollution into the environment, and tomorrow we will dump more, and there is no effective worldwide response. Until we start sharply reducing global-warming pollution, I will feel that I have failed.” (Walsh) Perhaps the paradigm has changed. Climate change is now talked about at every level of government, in large and small businesses, and communities across the globe. It’s a topic that functions to affect our economy and our environment. Moving forward, it’s important to understand why our way of life will be affected by the way we tackle these issues surrounding climate change. Climate change is the single most important issue affecting the human race today due to its widespread impact on our survival; impacting food sources, transportation, weather, geography and other life forms on the earth.

Seeing climate change as an emergency doesn't always make people make actions because of many psychological barriers that limit the mitigation of climate change. Frantz and Mayer in their article" The Emergency of Climate Change: Why are We Failing to Take action? "Published in Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (2009) and Gifford in " The Dragons of Inaction. Psychological Barriers That Limit Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation" published in American Psychology (2011), discussed the reasons why the American public are failing to take action to Climate Change even though they know that it is a grave issue. They also offered some suggestions that help in getting over those barriers.

Because of the most recent election season, there has been a renewed interest in the topic of climate change. In the 2016 Presidential election, the green party received over 1.2 million popular votes nationwide, when they usually receive only 100 thousand or so. With an increased interest in the topic of climate change, I feel it is necessary to provide factual data and projections on the path climate change will take to decrease misinformation. I proclaim the correct course of action to solve the problem of climate change is to do nothing.

Temperature rising isn’t just abnormal; it’s a serious matter that has caught the attention of many scientists. Scientists has issued that climate change is happening and with all the burning of fossil fuel we’ll be looking at devastating consequences. In the editorial “How Mankind Blew the Fight against Climate Change,” published in the Washington Post (June 5, 2014), American environmentalist Bill McKibben discusses the major consequences of oil industries, arguing that limitations can happen if shareholders would stop investing in these unjust companies. McKibben supports the claim by presenting strong evidence of how global warming has created disastrophe like the death tolls in India, providing statements made from Exxon’s executive mocking renewable energy, and finding ways to solve the issue such as divesting. McKibben’s purpose is to stop shareholders from investing in big oil companies like Exxon Mobile, by introducing them to divestment. McKibben adapts an urgent tone for an audience that consists of those who believe that the climate is changing and are caused by burning of fossil fuel. In this essay, I analyze Bill McKibben’s usage of strategic methods for strengthening his claims. Identifying his choices of rhetorical devices, I plan on voicing his approach by breaking down how he incorporates logos and pathos to persuade the audience of this urgent issue concerning our world. McKibben structure his article in a style that best explains his point, his urgency

To say that the issue of climate is resolved in the United States of America would be a falsehood. It is a commonly heard claim that 97% of climate researchers believe that global warming is real (Skeptical Science, 2012), and one would think that such consensus would inspire action among all positions of government. However, there is still the minority of scientists who do not explicitly agree with, or completely deny these beliefs. One such scientist is Richard Lindzen, who argues that there is an emotional, propagandistic reason why there would be such a large percentage of scientists who believe that climate change is caused by human factors.

There is an unfortune truth when it comes to climate change and the United States specifically. Because of the fairly new technological and financial advances into a blossomed first world country, businesses and media pick up the bad habit of spreading misinformation due to buzzwords or to maintain their comfortable industries. Because of this, along with uneducated and uninformed consumers wishing the same,people will blindly accept these allegations of climate change being a hoax like it is a piece of propaganda against the government or that they are just plain wrong because in the short-term and in their perspective, they see nothing wrong. The birds are chriping, the sun is shining and everything is as it should be, but once people are educated and informed of facts, statistics, academic reports, funding cuts, and hidden personal endeavors, they begin to realize that climate change is being misunderstood either by conscious denial (and pretending to agree for the sake of making others believe so too) or by general misinformation.

When thinking about the topic of climate change, my mind tends to go in twenty different places. I want to have a complete and honest understanding of climate change, but being such a dynamic topic with so many aspects, that may be hard to achieve. These aspects include scientific research, the economy, the government’s contribution, and society’s contribution to it. My prior knowledge of what exactly climate change and global warming is, comes from brief explanations in science classes and research that I have done on my own so I do not sound completely clueless while discussing this issue. From my understanding, the two sides of this debate are the politicians and the scientists. In my opinion, I will always stand on the environment’s side,

In the article "Human nature makes it easier to deny climate change than to confront it" by David Horsey in the LAtimes on January 27, 2017. Argues that as a human race we are going the easy way to a void things that is unimportant to address right now. And we also tend to forget about it until it is out of time to address it. Climate change is one of those problem that we as a whole tend to deny it potential of damaging our planets, and further poison our atmosphere. I think this is a major problem that need to be consider greatly, and start to formulate some kind of plan to attack this climate change problem.