The article, Can Progress On Climate Change Keep Up With Its Quickening Pace? By Tom Steyer, is about the reanalysis being done by climate scientists about the timescale on which climate change is occurring. Previously it was believed that global temperatures would rise 2 degrees Celsius (which is The Danger Zone) by 2050, but new estimates have the Earth entering that Danger Zone several years earlier. This is relevant because if we do nothing about climate change for too much longer it will have detrimental effects on future generations, and even on current generations as we are already seeing climate changes devastating consequences. This article relates to the current chapter, political thinking, because in American politics one major political party denies the existence of climate change despite overwhelming evidence that it exists. This is an example of flawed political thought, they are not making using correct information to make political judgements and therefore are not anchored in reality when talking about issues relating to climate change, such as regulating the energy industry and subsidizing clean energy. What is it going to take for those on the right who deny the existence of climate change to finally accept reality and allow real clean energy reform to be passed? https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-progress-on-climate-change-keep-up-with-its-quickening-pace/2016/08/26/f5934118-68b8-11e6-8225-fbb8a6fc65bc_story.html?utm_term=.b6d888cb2335

Wow! This is very thought provoking...
ReplyDeleteElliot Davis: I honestly think that it is going to take the melting of the polar ice caps and a sea level rise that at least covers all coastal states. I think this because the people who deny climate change do it because of the lack of physical evidence that confirms the drastic predictions. Yes, scientifically, it has been proven that CO2 traps heat, but they need physical evidence of it happening, such as a huge rise in global temperatures and the elimination of snow and winter. Logical arguments supported by statistics sadly cannot suppress ignorant thinking in many cases, only visual evidence can.
ReplyDeleteGreat Posting! Darlene Gordon
ReplyDelete