Global Warming Denial
Global warming and Climate change have been a center of global discussion since the pre-industrialization. It is estimated that human activities have warmed the world by 1.5ºC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2019). The impact of this change has been felt across many parts of the world. It has shaken the ecosystem, both aquatic and terrestrial, prompting the question if indeed, the ecosystem can provide goods and services to humans (Bulleri, 2018). policies have been discussed in these fora and put into action to try and mitigate this global problem.
In the quest to come up with solutions to minimize, prevent, and eradicate global warming and climate change, lies the challenge of the phenomenon of global warming denial. The phenomenon of global warming denial has taken center stage as one of the severe difficulties in combating the effects of global warming and climate change. Given that global warming and climate change should be a conversation of all nations, governments, international agencies, and every individual on the globe, different narratives have emerged over time (Riley et al., 2015).
These narratives are the drivers of global warming denials phenomenon that refute the efforts championed to tackle global warming. The global warming denial messages are seen to be driven by international organizations that see themselves as the key stakeholders, developing their visions and missions within this universal issue (Riley et al., 2015).
Even though the number of research work done to create awareness and promote global warming and climate change is enormous compared to the denial reporting, the phenomenon of global warming denial been increasingly tremendously (Ekohomika, 2015). The researchers who are seen to be disputing the theory of global warming, are coming together to form organizations, undertake projects and programs to further their ideas, example of this includes the International Climate Science Coalition.
Global warming denial based on unpredictable future results
(Feygina et al., 2019) explains how the scope and unpredictability of any projected disasters would undermine the theory of global warming, primarily when they do not occur. The skeptics of global warming often refer to the unpredictability of the future as implied by the research scientists. They base their arguments on how unlikely the predicted outcomes put across by research experts, may never come to pass or even on the unforeseen predictions given earlier. The question of whether the possibilities given as the likelihood of the future climatic patterns is debatable to some. Co-founder of the International Journal of forecasting, Scott Armstrong, in his explainer, says that nobody knows about the future prediction; in other places, it cools down, and in others, it heats up, one cannot ascertain the United Nations Reports (Ekohomika, 2015). Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Global Warming Denials due to peoples’ beliefs
People tend to be concerned with global warming on scorching weather months with the Google search volume index on the phrase ‘global warming’ rating higher at such time (Choi et al., 2018). People would make sense out of the local temperatures, as this what is noticeable to them and relatable to their personal experiences. They would not relate to or consider the global trend that would occur in the next 10 to 20 years to come.
According to a survey conducted in 2016 by Yale Program on Climate Change communication, about 70% of adults believe global warming is indeed happening, with only 40% expressing their concerns that global warming would affect them personally (Choi et al., 2018). These statistics point out to a vast percentage of people who have embraced the phenomenon of global warming denial. This also translates to the factual evidence that most people are not aware that environmental activism is a personal responsibility of every individual.
Still, on the general public (Feygina et al., 2019), findings show how more women than men take the initiative in environmental matters irrespective of age group or country. This is on the basis that women more empathy and care for the environment. This makes them the idealists in the conversation of environmental activism.
Global warming denial led by other scientists
The phenomenon of global warming denial is driven by other scientists who have outwardly denied the concept of increasing global warming, and climate change has continued to challenge the efforts of the scientific research and policies made to combat global warming. They also challenge reports and results provides by the organization, given these mandates of addressing issues of global warming.
Scientists and scholars such as Professor Rowan Sutton of Reading University denied the 2013 findings by United Nations Organizations warning that human activities are responsible for 95% changes in climate trends (Ekohomika, 2015). He stated that was false, backing his argument that that has reduced over the last 10 to 15 years. This gives the conclusion that the findings of the results are likely to be delivered to favor these nations. This conflicting information derails the efforts put into pushing the theory of global warming and enacting changes to mitigate it. Some researchers have come out to claim that the oceans are capable of absorbing the amount of heat produced at the moment.
The phenomenon of global warming denial is also fuelled by those who argue on the errors made by researchers at the point of data analysis, methods of data collections, and interpretation of results. It has been questionable that what if data errors are either intentionally or unintentionally made by humans to come up with pre-determined results (Ekohomika, 2015). Other than the research scientists, Nations are involved in coming up with pre-determined results that are erroneous.
The draft of 2013 United Nations reports that led to the final reporting of the earth’s temperature was manipulated by delegations of Germany, Hungary, and Belgium to suit their interests. These Nations wanted alteration of the temperature of the planet to depict the previous findings, just sell the idea that global warming was indeed happening (Ekohomika, 2015).
Results manipulation, have killed the theory of global warming and supported the phenomenon of global warming denial. Pieces of evidence through leaked email conversation between Michael Mann and a member of IPCC, Phil Jones, revealing that over the last decade, global temperature has not risen, and data must be omitted (Ekohomika, 2015). These kinds of revelations have distorted the creditability and reliability of these research organizations leading to more questions on their research findings.
Conflicting findings
Much of the scientific research work done on global warming, though backed up by intensive methods of data analysis, are dubbed with contradictory research finding or argumentum on the interpretation of the results. The cause of increased temperature on the earth is associated with increased human activities that caused emission of greenhouse gases on the one hand, while reports from NASA shows that the Sun warms its systems in the cycles that would mean hot temperatures at one time after several years (Ekohomika, 2015).
Politics drive global warming denial
Global warming denial is mostly inspired by political structures whose fundamental skepticism based on attaining vital interests. Policies enacted by bodies researching global warming such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are said to be affected by political interests coming from the leading nations (Ekohomika, 2015).
Histories of the Cold war are some of the problems promoting the phenomenon of global warming (Joshua, 2014), stating how the science of climate science has entangled with politics of history, and political interest. The idea of who is more economically, politically and financially industrialized as a nation amid global warming, distracts the focus on a united purpose to see through that global warming is addressed together without segregation of other countries.
Political leaders who typically have a huge following and influence in the funding for most of the organizations subscribed to promoting the realm of global warming can collapse the efforts put on global warming. For example, Donald Trump, through his Twitter account, made strong statements that’s; “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” When politics is involved in critical matters of global warming, people tend to take sides with their political ideologies and forgetting about the real conversation on Global Warming and its effects. Moreover, they tend to promote what is supported by their influential leaders.
The global warming denial seems to an idea supported by the most emitter of greenhouse gases. People question why the world’s second emitter does not commit to the fight of climate change following President Donald Trump’s announcement of pulling out the United States from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (Joshua, 2014, pg207). Such sentiments are not only derailing the theory of global warming but are also the inaction by politicians on the fight against anthropogenic climate change that also worsens the situation. The politicians are said to be funded by fuel fossils lobbyists who see the quest for global warming theory as a threat to their economic activity and interests. Those with commercial interests will see into it that the phenomenon of global warming denial thrives on closing in on the risks to their business operations and activities.
Impact of global warming denial
The phenomenon of global warming rejection has led to the spread of misinformation. The deniers of the theory of global warming have their interests at hand, have misguided the public, shared the wrong information with the public, and undermined the efforts of environmental activists. The policies-makers such as IPCC have found it hard to implement the strategic plans due to the high level of misinformation and conflicting findings.
Policymakers and environmental activists have not received sufficient support from both the general public and stakeholders as a result of the denier of the theory of global warming, putting out information that undermines their creditability and reliability. Their image and efforts are, therefore, distorted. Since global warming requires worldwide support and intervention, the lack of this downplays their role.
Mistrust has continued to grow in the organization mandated to carry out research and on the roles performed by environmental activists trying to pass out information and communicate on the progress of global warming. With the deniers of global warming theory insisting on these organizations package information in a way that suits their interests, it creates room for mistrust from the public. Allegations of political interference and involvement in research findings also have undermined their role in promoting the theory of global warming.
Conclusion
The phenomenon of global warming denial cannot be underestimated. It is gaining roots in all aspects of the conversations and through organizations, institutions, and individuals. Organizations tasked with the mandate such as IPCC, the United Nations should be put in sufficient strategies to mitigate its effect in the globe or in pursuant of proving that it is a narrative that should not have a place in the field of research science.
It has impacted negatively on the duties put into ensuring that everyone is informed not only on the dangers of global warming but the mitigations measures required. Since global warming is a global problem, steps should be taken beyond Nations, and legal laws drawn through social will, the political will to promote sensitization on global warming and its effect.
In the future, even as efforts of combating global warming should be enforced, and concerned parties should ensure that there is effective communication, non-partisan, and independence. The deniers of global warming are continuously building their networks, using social media to impact their agenda and spread information. Global warming sensitizers should ensure strategic communication and use social media to allow for a co-constructed future (Riley et al., 2015).
References
Bulleri (2018), Marine Biology165:65.Effects of global warming on species interactions. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-018-3323-1
Choi, Gao, and Jiang. (2018) Attention to Global Warming. The Review of Financial Studies 33(3), 1112-1145 doi.org/10.1093rfs/hhz086
Еkohomika. (2015) Bulletin of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Economics 1(166): 51-56.Global warming between science and politics. DOI: dx.doi.org/ 10.17721/1728-2667.2015/166-1/6
Feygina, Jost, and Goldsmith. (2010) System Justification, the Denial of Global Warming, and the Possibility of ”System-Sanctioned Change. Personality and Social Psychology. http://psp.sagepub.com/content/36/3/326 DOI: 10.1177/0146167209351435
IPCC (2019) Special Report: Global warming of 1.5 ºC. www.ipcc.ch
Joshua Howe. (2018) Behind the Curve: Science and the Politics of Global warming
Riley, Wang, Y.Wang and Feng. (2016) Global warming: Chinese Narratives of the Future. Global Media and China 2016, 1(1–2) 12 –31DOI: 10.1177/2059436416654770