After reading Swartz and Reidy’s articles, the statement “You’ll often hear from climate contrarians that climate science is still in its infancy, too young to be reliable.” Isn’t necessarily true, as that besides time alone the controversial science behind climate change shows us evidence such as that from the Reidy article, Tyndall found that carbon dioxide and water vapor are extremely heat absorbent. Now water vapor can be argued as that water is one of the few if not the only element that can change into all 3 states of matter, which is gas, liquids, and solids. This change is determined by the elements temperature. But the gas carbon dioxide can absorb IR radiation otherwise known as inferred radiation, which also emits from our sun along with uv radiation. Then Swartz’s article a scientist named Eunice Foote conducted an experiment with the water vapor and carbon dioxide theory. Her findings stated that the test tubes with the natural gasses were warmer temperatures than the test tube with normal dry air. The tube with the water vapor and its effect is called humidity. Areas closer to the equator particularly are warmer because of the rising water vapor from near by oceans or large bodies of water. This is because that the carbon combined with the oxygen molecules, absorb more radiation. I think many people who deny the idea of climate change don’t understand the basic chemistry and facts behind the science, and take the news to a hysterical understanding, believing that the world is in chaos. When in reality, science has provided us with an understanding about how our actions effect the planet.
Which leads into how come the political world hasn’t or somehow disregarded this science/ contemporary issue. Mostly its money, politics has a higher profit interest in controversy, and world relations, things like trade and manufacturing makes the economy run, and gives the government its paycheck. And since we live in a world where our life goal expectation is to get wealthy and reproduce, it doesnt provide much time for contemporary issues like climate change.
The seconded is mis-information and personal feelings. People often resent or disregard what they don’t understand. And in the world of limitles information at our finger tips everyone thinks they know everything. but the fact is climate change isn’t knew and over the course of earths entire history, the planets temperature has fluctuated greatly. Before the ice age, paleo science believes that the planet was actually way warmer than it is now, allowing many species of dinosaurs to adapt to a humid, plant rich, and aggressive lifestyle. this also infers that there was a higher concentration of carbon dioxide and oxygen on the planet that would have been un fit for our species. Then after the separation of Pangea, the ice age came and much of the northern part of the planet was iced over. Then finally not longer from then to now, we have been around. So the ignorance people often have is based primarily on the fact that they simply don’t know about the basic science behind it.
And finally its the hysteria surrounding the issue. In todays world controversy sells more than a good hearted idea, and because of this the cycle continues. Controversy gets nowhere whilst paying the governments to keep debating, which leads to constant mis-information.
What do all of you think?