When the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was established in the 1990s, negotiators focused on greenhouse gas emissions, or GHGs. They discussed mitigation actions; ways to reduce GHGs. The landmark Kyoto Protocol of 1997 (at COP 3) emphasized mitigation, with commitments from developed countries to reduce their production of and reliance on fossil fuels. The 2015 Paris Agreement set the goal of a global temperature rise of no more than 1.5 degrees centigrade by 2050. This goal would be achieved only if developed countries - the major GHG emitters - transitioned significantly to renewable energy sources. This has not happened. Countries are expanding their use of renewables but not fast enough th meet the 1.5 degree goal. Consequently, negotiators now devote considerable time to discussing adaptation - how to deal with a warming world and its consequencxes, such as wildfires, drought, intense hurricanes and typhoons... These articles relate to the imp...
No climate change denial is not a legitimate position. In fall term I took a climate change class here at Oregon State and learned all about climate change and the science behind it. It has been proven over and over again by scientists all around the world that climate change is real. Some of the effects of climate change on earth are an increase of earth's average temperature, increasing ocean temperatures, ice and glacier melting, increased sea levels, coral bleaching and there are many other harmful side effects. Climate change denial will never be a legitimate position and the evidence will always invalidate the argument that climate change is not real. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what-evidence-exists-earth-warming-and-humans-are-main-cause
ReplyDeleteWhile everyone is allowed to have their beliefs, it's disappointing to see that politicians who for all intents and purposes are expected to be intelligent individuals so blatantly deny the proof of climate change. Average temps are rising, as well as sea levels. There are ecosystems being ravaged by climate change. Examples of these are ecosystems existing in the Arctic and mountains. This puts those species that primarily reside at these locations at an even greater risk and potential extinction (i.e. polar bears) (via: https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-ecosystems_.html#:~:text=Mountain%20and%20arctic%20ecosystems%20and,extinctions%2C%20especially%20in%20sensitive%20regions.)
ReplyDeleteThese politicians represent their constituents, and many of them are so easily influenced by the opinions of them. This is why legislation like DeSantis' is dangerous. By denying climate change's existence, you're leaving a large group of people unaware and unprepared to face that reality when climate change gets so bad that it's impossible to avoid.
Despite overwhelming scientific evidence, some people and politicians continue to deny climate change, claiming that human activity doesn't impact the climate. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis signed a law removing the term "climate change" from state statutes, erasing climate mitigation goals. This denial persists even as Florida faces rising sea levels, increased flooding, and stronger hurricanes. These environmental threats endanger both the state's natural environment and its economy, highlighting the urgent need for climate action. Removing the concept of climate change from state statutes is not a good thing. It prevents the state from effectively addressing and mitigating the impacts of climate change. This denial of climate science can hinder necessary actions to protect the environment and economy.
ReplyDeletehttps://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/4697519-even-climate-deniers-cant-hide-from-climate-change/
This question gives me two potential schools of thought. On the one hand, you could make the case that any position held by someone is a legitimate position because it is what they believe. That is regardless of wither their position is true or holds any water. On the other hand, you could also say that a view that is verifiably false based on our understanding of science and the world we live in is not legitimate because it is not true. I for one believe this to be a view point that someone is allowed to have but hopefully one that would change based on evidence of the contrary being brought to the table. Some of the more common arguments against climate changes relation to human activity as well as how to refute them/ why they are not true are provided here: https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3z737/the-12-arguments-every-climate-denier-uses-and-how-to-debunk-them
ReplyDeleteThe existence of climate change has been overwhelmingly supported by the vast majority of scientists for decades. Aside from the testimonies of scientists, these past few years have seen a huge amount of natural disasters/climate events from flash floods, droughts, tornadoes, and wildfires at exacerbated rates and intensity. Climate change is happening before our very eyes and is undeniable.
ReplyDeleteAt this point if someone still denies climate change is real, there is no way they will ever be convinced. The only way you get this far while holding that belief is by being intentionally ignorant, or by blindly following others.
ReplyDelete