The Truth about Global Warming - Essay Example

Introduction Global warming is one such issue that has sparked unending debates among scientists whether, after all, this is truth or fiction. In his June 2007 article, “Global Warming Myth”, Prof. David Bellamy of the New Zealand Science Coalition, criticized both the claims that global warming is happening now for lack of hard evidence, and the naysayers of a climate catastrophe for scaring instead of allaying fears among people in order to make them prepared. Curiously, however, both of those who claim and oppose that global warming is already a reality, use science to support their arguments. But why both camps do not agree on a single truth about whether or not global warming is myth or reality if their basis is science, which is grounded on well-researched facts and sound reasoning, remains one of the biggest questions today and what this paper is interested in finding out. Analysis The main argument of this short discourse is only impliedly stated in the form of the quotation by Tom Lehrer, a great mathematician and satirist. Lehrer said once that it is better to be prepared than be scared. Prof. Bellamy did not explicitly indicate what these global warming proponents should have done in service of humanity. For his part, he mentioned that what is needed is to identity and thresh out sustainable endeavors to help in maintaining climate and landscape stability similar with what his country, New Zealand did. Global Warming as Multi-billion Marketing Hype The ongoing debate about global warming and climate change has escalated over the years and Prof. Bellamy argued, his second minor argument, that the situation is being hyped even without the fool-proof backing of scientific evidence. In fact, the effort already costs the world billions of dollars to the note of US$50 billion. Credit this to one of global warming’s leading advocates, former US Vice-President Al Gore, who have persistently campaigned about our warming earth. But the author rejected Gore’s claims that the lowering of temperature is wildly driving to extinction the polar bears, and heightening the increase of the case of malaria all over the world. Prof. Bellamy counter-argued these by stating that more than ever, polar bears have doubled in population, while malaria, a mosquito-borne disease, is actually deterred by low temperatures. Global Warming Debate and Religious Soul-Searching, compared His other minor argument zeroed in on the assumption that the whole debate about global warming may be compared with religious soul-searching. While the basis used is the same (in this case science whereas in religion, it is the bible), however, if one is not analytical or critical, one may be disillusioned to believe in lies than the truth, and this line of argument may also apply to which position to take in the global warming debate. Prof. Bellamy observed that these champions of global warming fail to use science and refer only to predictions, which are not supported by evidence, to back their claims. He revealed two undeniable cases that will prove his assertion. One is reliable temperature records that showed no significant changes of up and down over the past century. Second is that there is no proofs to prove that carbon dioxide is the villain to this climate doom. As a result, those who will oppose the more established argument, or the one with the backing and support of more popular names and the media, may be termed as heretics or deniers. Additionally, Prof. Bellamy pointed out that to become a heretic may be better than a denier. History proved wrong most bigots who defend their dogmatic beliefs, he said and added that such is already a reality in this global warming debate. He said it is but unfair to simply dismiss non-believers like him who use real science than a “science” that rely only on predictions based on complex computer models. Hence, he cried that a “Macarthyism complete with witch hunts” is happening for those regarded as heretics. Only with robust science, he argued, can this scientific soul-searching will lead us to the truth. No matter who wins or lose, no matter who’s ego was dented, science’s name will not be smeared. Evaluation In the essay, Prof. Bellamy raised, while impliedly one of his minor arguments, that the global discussion on global warming and spiritualism may be similar for both are founded on a certain belief system, however, the evidence and facts must be supported by data given or proved through the use of biblical or scientific evidence. However, the proponents of the arguments for and opposed to global warming each claim they use science, and this may give the people the difficulty of choosing between two options and by weighing which position to take or with whom to side. But it should be remembered, that there must only be one who is telling the truth, and the opposite is lie. But without acknowledging the claims of the global warming “heretics”, a culture of name calling and “Macarthyism complete with witch hunts” is really bound to happen and as is the case, is already a reality experienced by minorities like Prof. Bellamy, who oppose is a staunch critic of global warming. He likewise addressed several reasons why people should believe that this is an overhyped issue and only a myth manufactured to sow fears among people without making them prepared. As is expected of this kind of discourse, citing of evidence to support the claims of the author is limited. With two powerful, data sets to support his argument, Prof. Bellamy begin by mentioning data of several temperature records of up and down from 1910s to late 1990s as something that do not significantly showed something that should cause some concerns from the global warming proponents. In addition, he also indicated that there are much stronger proofs to show that pre-historic ice ages have caused drastic effects to the climate and sea levels globally. His other minor argument that the climate fear-and-doom hype marketing is already costing the world billions of US dollars is obviously backed by the author’s understanding of the case. It is not bad to spend billions of pesos for a cause that is worthy of support and recognition, however, Prof. Bellamy argued that in this case the arguments by the so-called champions of global warming could hardly prove the existence of global warming. Thus, any means aimed to promote an unscientific claims should not be encouraged. The writer even note that a film made by Al Gore titled the Inconvenient Truth, which won an Oscar Award for Best Documentary Feature, was guity of sowing fear among people about what an impending doom brought about by the drastic climate change. Using this as a premise to support the main argument of the author, he move on to state that robust science is only present when there is robust argument based on verifiable facts and data. As Prof. Bellamy ever hope to happen, it is better to make people aware and ready in any event that the predicted major global climate catastrophe occur. The author also established his main argument by citing some examples of sustainable endeavors initiated in ensuring climate and landscape stability in his country. He listed New Zealand as a country highly-aware that that habitat destruction and loss of biodiversity are brought can negatively impact the stability of our climate and landscape. Prof. Bellamy stressed that this country became the first nation that initiated the eradication of feral animal plants and animals in an effort to keep the biosphere in balance through making restoration of the natural ecosystenms. Since he believe that fear will not bring the world the change in the environmental condition of the world, he wish to mobilize other nations and people to take part in this global mission. Then, he called on for the world to follow the New Zealand model of ensuring sustainable efforts to be implemented. Conclusion The author, although faced with a still very limited evidence to support his claims, however, heightened the new level of awareness to the curious mind to be more critical and inquisitive of data or information presented of him regarding global warming. He may have successfully raised his arguments but may also have risked being labeled to be oversimplifying the whole issue about global warming. As of late, there are still some contradictory claims as well about what causes global warming that even some scientists’ findings contradict each other reports. However, conclusion cannot be easily made as further studies and researched need repeated trials and validations to be hardened as scientific. Prof. Bellamy’s arguments may also have been more authoritative and commanding should he used a more global examples for the proposed sustainability efforts than the tiny New Zealand as sample. By using the said country’s experience in his paradigm about ensuring environmental sustainability may be too small a sample to use, beside the fact that this small nation is not industrial-based but a haven for eco-tourism. Read More