The Pros And Cons Of Climate Change

Climate change involves multiple variables behaving in nonlinear and unpredictable, constituting for uncertainty and irregularity to the limits of knowledge. Scientists defer from unpredictable to constructive thinking concluding “the science is settled”. Constructivist thinking focuses on human-centered creativity response to climate change solutions, placing limits of future outcomes. An opposite approach allows for progression toward climate change mitigation. They believe the data must be adjusted to confirm global warming when temperature data disagree with the models. True believers fear catastrophic change and drastic measures need to be made. Measures include reducing green house gas emissions, mitigating, or adapting. Skeptics cannot move past the uncertainty, manipulating it as a grounds of proof. Skepticism becomes locked with the political field today (Berry et al. 2016).

Manipulation of the knowledge derives from societies control and investments in politics. Power and interests will decide the perception of scientific discoveries. In all, climate change response depends on those of power and investments (Berry et al. 2016). The fossil fuel industry funds much of the political reluctance on climate change. They fund politicians and scientific research promoting the concern of uncertainty. Although opposite of popular belief within the country, the Republican Party control in Congress, White House, and the Senate can take action against climate change. As deniers to global warming as human caused the Republican Party uses it power over the country to shift the basis of science. The threat to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement shows the consequences of denial and the power of a government (Shah 2017). Similar actions can be seen taken by the government of