Disparity in the Views of the Public on Global Climate Change - Essay Example

Moreover, in the initial stages, the media was given to quoting scientists, concerning global warming. As such, scientists were deemed to be the primary sources of such information. Subsequently, the media resorted to quoting politicians, interests groups, and other entities who had a vested interest in the ramifications of this issue (Durfee & Corbett, 2005, p. 88). The media, with its penchant for sensationalism, had preferred to promote the view that there was considerable uncertainty regarding global warming.

Furthermore, a small section of scientists disagrees with the mainstream scientific evaluation regarding global warming. These individuals entertain various opinions regarding the cause behind this phenomenon. Some of these scientists declare that it has not been determined whether the primary cause of global warming is human activity (Haldar, 2010, p. 140). On the other hand, there are a few scientists who ascribe global warming to increased solar activity, cosmic rays, natural variation, ocean currents, or unidentified natural causes (Haldar, 2010, p. 141).

Nevertheless, some of the studies on global warming have contended that the contemporary level of solar activity is at a maximum. This has been conjectured based on sunspot activity and other factors. The Sun’s output can vary, on account of solar activity. Researchers, such as Solanki have held that solar activity for the past 6 to 7 decades could have been the greatest in eight millennia (Haldar, 2010, p. 141). However, they have declared that solar activity is not a significant contributor to contemporary global warming.

In addition, modern science presents its results as probabilistic and statistical data. Thus, there is no certainty, and this increases with the complexity of the phenomena being considered. A telling example of this situation is that of climate science. All the same, this uncertainty has induced some individuals to declare the presence of a major scientific controversy, despite the absence of any such development (Jordan, 2007).