The Problem Of Climate Change

Conclusion: If we all would do as many things that we possibly can to help reduce greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere, we would all be doing a great thing by helping to ensure that our grand-kids and theirs will still have this beautiful planet to live on and enjoy. Thank

In Michael Pollan’s article “Why Bother?”, he addresses the issue of climate change and the inner reasoning behind those who don’t acknowledge or bother with the crisis. Pollan intertwines a discussion of the rising danger of global warming with a psychological discussion of personal virtue. He emphasis his main point of climate crisis by providing examples and data stating, “we have only ten years left to start cutting—not just slowing—the amount of carbon we’re emitting…So:eight years left and a great deal to do.” (117). His discussion of personal reasoning to the problem of people not responding to global warming is intertwined through the direct question that is the title and by other experiences such as Wendell Berry’s comments on the

It is becoming increasingly certain that climate change will have severe adverse effects on the environment in years to come. Addressing this issue poses a serious challenge for policy makers. How we choose to respond to the threat of global warming is not simply a political issue. It is also an economic issue and an ethical one. Responsible, effective climate change policy requires consideration of a number of complex factors, including weighing the costs of implementing climate change policies against the benefits of more environmentally sustainable practices. Furthermore, this analysis must take place amidst serious gaps in the existing research and technology concerning the developing climatic condition.

Stephen Schneider states that it is his "strong belief that there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to form a subjective prior" concerning the verity of global warming and the human causes that underlie it (Schneider). His argument is admittedly based on "a priori" (before the fact) knowledge, yet he attempts to move from "a priori" knowledge to "a posteriori" (after the fact) by introducing the lightest touches of empirical data and suggesting that much more data will be accumulated in the future to confirm his "a priori" assertion. Schneider's argument is brief but convincing in its own way: he admits that his approach to the question of global warming is subjective but that time should prove it to be objectively true. This paper will analyze Schneider's argument by summarizing it, defining the key terms, assessing the conclusion and showing how it follows from the proposition.

(2013). Climate Change, Human Rights and Moral Responsibility. Climate Change and Individual Responsibility, 1-25. doi:10.1057/9781137464507.0007

For many years there has been a great debate between scientists who believe that human activity has major negative effects on climate change, and those who argue that climate change is caused by a variety of factors, not just harmful human activity. Those who support that belief that activities such as the burning of fossil fuels could cause disastrous climate changes and global warming and those who believe that research has been skewed to alter the way findings are presented fiercely debate when and how climate change should be addressed by governments. These debates have caused the idea of Global Warming to become not only a scientific concern, but a political concern as well. With both sides having strong convictions with respect to how the issues are addressed, it has allowed events such as “Climate-Gate” come to pass.

“One straightforward version of act-consequentialism holds that actions are wrong if there is some available alternative action whose outcome would be impersonally better” (Morgan-Knapp, Goodman, 180). Act consequentialists are right in the sense that climate change is too big of an issue to take on singlehandedly. If everyone takes the necessary steps to reduce their own carbon footprints then that would transfer over to reducing global warming as a whole. But if only a few make changes, then the outcome would not be considered morally right because it would not have produced the best results. Global warming would not be affected if only a few people did their part, so it would not be morally right for those people to try and reduce their carbon footprints. Reducing one’s carbon footprint takes time and money and the sacrifices that one makes would outweigh the outcome of those sacrifices, which would support act consequentialists view on climate change.

The highly-impassioned issue of human-made climate change, or the idea that current climate-warming trends can be attributed to modern-day human activities, has become a very debated topic in our current century. In the last few decades, proponents and challengers of the anthropomorphic effects of this problem have volleyed arguments back and forth about whether climate change is a paramountly human-caused phenomenon or a predominantly natural process, with the latter arguing that there are few to no man-made sources like environmental experts seem to constantly urge. Jeffrey Mazo exhibits many reasons as to why individuals may be hasteful in denying the overwhelming impact of human activity on this ever-pressing issue in his article

There is a multitude of evidence that supports the notion that individualistic rational decision making is harmful to the collective. Additionally, the construct of most Western societies currently promotes unsustainable consumption and production habits as well there is evidence that unregulated capitalists’ markets also perpetuate unsustainable activity and make environmental legislation unappealing and in some cases fought against. Stephen M. Gardiner elaborates on the individual and collective idea and how, intrinsically, human nature is to think of self before the collective. In his research A Perfect Moral Storm: Climate Change, Intergenerational Ethics and the Problem of Moral Corruption Gardiner introduces his fundamental theory of why global citizenship has not been effective in altering climate change: The Tragedy of the Commons Paradox. The following excerpt from his research summarizes this

The primary goals of this essay is to provide a current description of processes within climate change, and to give an insight on the relative contribution of natural and human sources, with a particular emphasis on the implications for us. There will also be an understanding of linkages between atmospheric carbon and climate change, the views on apparent disagreements related to the climate change discussion, and the thoughts on ways forward. The idea that humans are causing climate change is the position of the Academies of Science from eighty countries , plus many scientific organizations that study this area. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researcher’s actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.

The first section of this paper establishes what exactly naturally occurring climate change is. What are the underlying causes? What happens when climate change occurs? Most importantly how do we know this? The second section of this paper seeks to use our new found knowledge of natural climate change. It builds upon the premise of the first section and the ideas introduced there. Since we know the natural causes of climate change we can draw conclusions relating to the impact and influence that humanity is having on climate change. It is by first establishing naturally occurring climate changes legitimacy and causes and then linking these causes to our now current anthropogenic climate change This second section is also the more controversial, nobody disputes naturally occurring climate change, but as soon as causation is assigned to humanity and particular sections within; it becomes a vigorously debated topic. By first establishing climate change as a naturally occurring

Many people, particularly of the United States, do not know about climate change (CC), nor do they know about how they are personally contributing to it. When discussed, most strategies created to combat climate change discount the power of education in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (a contributor to CC). In this paper, I argue that climate change causes immense damage by borrowing from John Nolt’s The Individual’s Obligation to Relinquish Unnecessary Greenhouse-Gas-Emitting Devices (2013). The potential is so high that we, as individuals and institutions, have a moral obligation to educate our populace in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As an aside, I shall also attempt to quantify how much education could reduce emissions.

A controversy is brewing as to what is the real cause of climate change. A section of the population believes the problem is largely man made whereas others think it is a problem to do with natural causes. There is a wide range of views on this topic, but what causes a lot of concern is the fact that the recent years have experienced an accelerated climate change. It is for that reason that some scientists argue that what is being experienced is as a result of human activity. That is especially true considering that there has been no scientific body that has refuted those claims. Most climate change peer reviewed papers hold on to the claim that man has had a huge role to play in the changes going on in the environment; but while, at it, those in the businesses that are greatly blamed for the overproduction of greenhouse gases and other dangerous chemicals released into the atmosphere refute these claims.

David G. Victor, a journalist for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette newspaper, explained the reason he thinks that nothing is being done about climate change. In his article “Learning to deal with climate changes”, Victor claims that humans tend to focus on the everyday palpable things versus complicated future risks because “our mental space is limited” (par. 4). Written shortly after Hurricane Irma, Victor reflects on the actions that he believes should be taken but aren’t. Nonetheless, according to the journalist, the main reason climate action is not being taken has more to do with “the way

Through the decades’ people are seeing the effects on this planet that have been caused by climate change. But people are unaware that these weather patterns are abnormal, and need to be fixed before it is too late. There are major droughts, and record breaking high temperatures in places like California and in the Middle East while there are floods and hurricanes in Houston and Florida. The world seems like it is falling apart slowly, but some even wonder if there is enough evidence to prove that it is happening because of climate change, or global warming. Some people argue that it is just a hoax, and the earth is perfectly fine. However, it is a big coincidence that most people that say it is a hoax are gaining money by tearing down forests and polluting the air. The world population needs to be aware that some of the natural disasters happening are because of global warming. This planet’s climate and environment has been deteriorating, and it is not a coincidence that this is happening because of fracking, deforestation, and pollution. Some scientists believe it is too late to reverse the damage that we have done to Earth while some other scientists believe there is still a small window to at least slow down the effects that will happen. People are at fault for Earth’s climate change. It is crucial that the people try as much as they can to help stop climate change, so kids of the future do not have to live on an ugly and disastrous planet.