Global Warming: The Role of Politics - Essay Example

Lecturer: March 20, Global warming: The role of politics in the debate undermines scientific evidence Politics relates to power centers in which authorities govern their jurisdictions. Core to its scope are factors such as interest in resources and resource allocation that identifies political interests, a factor that may induce bias in interactions between political leaders and their followers and among politicians in a political framework or between territories. In a bid to resolve the possible conflicts, politicians resort to political compromises that often undermine scientific evidence. Further, the politicians use their positions and influence to manipulate public opinion, against scientific evidence, on controversial issues with the aim of succeeding in implementing politically compromised policies while disregarding scientifically viable solutions. The debate on global warming, its causes, and its solution is one of the issues that demonstrate political influence on how people understand science. Politics plays a more superior role in decision-making than science does as politicians are at the realm of power while scientists act as subordinates who offer advice based on evidence. Politicians then evaluates the evidence and uses it to make decisions, either according to recommendations from the evidence or upon modification of the recommendations to suit diversified interests. Political debates then follow to justify the decisions and to undermine significance of scientific evidence. Existing scientific evidence on global warming are diverse and points to significance of the phenomena and its effects on the environment and biodiversity. Strict and urgent decisions towards managing global warming through its causes would therefore be expected from political leaders but this has not been the case. Data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shows that while the level of carbon dioxide gas in the atmosphere has oscillated below 300 parts per million for the past 400000 years, it has risen sharply in the last half century to almost 400 parts per million. Scientific evidence further shows that concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and those of other gases, have an effect on the amount of heat that the atmosphere holds. With this relationship being proportional, higher concentration of the gases increases global temperature to account for global warming. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have further been associated with increased transmission of infrared rays to account for global warming. Research results from glacier specimens also show a close relationship between greenhouse gas concentrations and global warming (National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1). Empirical results from National Aeronautics and Space Administration further shows that sea levels have been raising and this identifies threats to lives and economic activities along coastlines. Further global warming that causes the rise may mean that coastal cities will be submerged in the sea in the next few years to cause displacement of people and even death as well as destruction of property. Analysis of historical data have further reported abnormal trend in temperature increase, increasing temperatures in seas and oceans, diminishing arctic sea ice, and extreme weather events, and the trends suggest that unless action is taken to control global warming, such occurrences may persist and increase in magnitude (National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1). Politics, despite the existing evidence, continue to blur the truth about global warming and its causes and solution. Significance of the politics begins among scientists who have diversified opinions on existence of global warming and its consequences and the scientists’ personal opinions and arguments influence people’s understanding of the science in global warming and other fields. Smith and Tailor explain possibility that some climatologists do not believe in existence of global warming, a notion that may have significant effects on people’s understanding. If this is a topic on climate and a professional in the field dispute it despite existence of evidence, then an individual who have confidence in the scientist is likely to believe the scientist as well and disregard the evidence. The scientists that agree to existence of global warming also still hold different opinions regarding involved theories in global warming. This establishes confusion among the public who look up to the scientists for guidance and the political power of individual scientists or groups of scientists is likely to influence public opinion. People may believe those who can defend their positions well or those in whom they have built confidence in previous interactions or previous scientific explanations (Smith and Taylor 59). In addition to the politics among scientists, contradictory opinions between scientists and political opinions also play a significant role in understanding the role of politics in informing how people understand science. Even though political entities have reported interest in the global warming concern and they seek to understand its scope and possible solution, scientists have raised concerns that reports by the political entities, which appear to be based on scientific findings, may be inaccurate and biased. Smith and Taylor’s account of activities at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change explains this. Even though scientists have acknowledge possible honest inaccuracy on global warming predictions, contrary opinions that many scientists have held over IPCC forecasts on causes and potential solutions of global warming shows that the politics based report may be unreliable. Unlike the IPCC, scientists explain that natural factors, and not manmade factors, could be causing global warming. The scientific opinion is based on empirical evidence and is often free from conflict of interest but people are likely to believe in political positions because of the greater level of media publicity that politicians control and influence that politicians have on people, having been elected by the people. Consequently, science may be compromised among people because of political forces. Lindzen Richard is a good example that illustrates potential bias of political entities. Despite having worked with IPCC in its publications and theories, the scientist remain critical of the political body and his personal experience and role in both scientific and political divide offers a reliable basis for understanding that politicians convey a contrary opinion to scientific facts and are therefore likely to misinform people on scientific issues. Controversy between professional and politicians have also been reported in other fields such as economics and this establishes reliability of the hypothesis that politicians and politics coerce people’s knowledge (Smith and Taylor 59). Auxt and Curtis offers a valid explanation to the political effects on people’s understanding of science through the concept of conflict of interest (78- 80). Using the concept of political opposition to communism, the authors explain possible existence of political bias with the aim of protecting elites’ interest. While communism offered a solution to poverty by reducing the gap between the rich and the poor, political forces fought it because it threatened capitalists’ interest. Interest of the capitalist population is also evident in the global issue and this could induce biased political campaign to misinform people and discredit scientific explanations on causes and potential solutions to global warming (Auxt and Curtis 78- 80). Existing data on global warming debate identifies the hypothesis that politicians and politics influence people’s understanding of science. A review of the knowledge supports the hypothesis because of the objective nature of scientific rationale over global warming and the critical view that scientists have over subjective political opinions. Existence of political interference of people’s knowledge in other fields such as in economic issues also supports the notion that politics and politicians may distort information to shift people’s understanding of knowledge. Cold war that existed between capitalism and communist ideologies with the aim of protecting capitalists’ interest further explains possible significance of politics and politicians in influencing people’s knowledge. The hypothesis that politics and politicians influence people’s understanding of science is therefore valid the interaction between scientific opinions and political opinions and actions on global warming explains this and past political effects on other subjects support this. Works cited Auxt, Jay, and Curtis, William. Global warming and the creator’s plan. Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Publishing Group, 2009. Print. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. “Climate change: How do we know?” National Aeronautics and Space Administration. N.d. Web. March 20, 2014. Smith, Zachary, and Taylor, Katrina. Renewable and alternative energy resources: A reference handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2008. Print. Read More