Abstract

There has always been a scientific controversy over climate change and its legitimacy which continues to divide scientists apart to this day. Many scientists argue that climate change is a real deal and a major problem, becoming worse with time. Others, however, disagree and state that climate change is rather exaggerated and a hoax. Both sides, with sufficient evidence, have supporting claims which seek to understand the truths of climate change and to the extent to which it is a major issue or not.

Climate change is best defined as the long-term change in global, regional, and local weather patterns which include warming due to “heat-trapping”greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, cooling by extreme cold temperatures, or other factors besides temperature change. A big factor of climate change includes the greenhouse effect and global warming; the idea of a gradual increase in the Earth’s atmospheric temperature due to large amounts of carbon dioxide, methane, and water vapor absorbing heat in the Earth’s lower atmosphere. These theories of climate change, however, have never been clear cut as many scientists argue that climate change is a real ideology versus climate change being misinterpreted and exaggerated; overall disagreeing with opposing views. For the longest duration of time, scientists have held opposing views of climate change; whether it is real, a hoax, or depicted inaccurately by reliable scientific sources and methods of measurement.

One view of climate change bases its central idea stating climate change is a rapidly accelerating process which is very much dependent on humankind and anthropogenic activity. Much of this human activity includes the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation/tree-clearing, farming livestock, and the emission of carbon dioxide (a critical greenhouse gas) through means of electricity production (power plants). In fact, the enormous amount of carbon dioxide produced by the burning of fossil fuels accounts for approximately three-quarters of total human carbon emissions (Denchak). Furthermore, much of other strengths of this point of view lies in the evidence of the retreating of mountain glaciers, the loss of polar ice caps, and the continuation of an increase in average sea levels across the globe. Global mean sea level has risen approximately 8-9 inches (21-24 centimeters) since 1880, which gives further evidence to the loss of polar ice caps and retreating of mountain glaciers through melting (Lindsey). In addition, this statistic supports the claim made by those recognizing climate change of the heating of the Earth’s atmospheric temperatures over long durations of time. As greenhouse gases are released into the Earth’s atmosphere, more heat is absorbed from the sun, thus altering and raising the Earth’s global average temperatures and leading to ice melting (Thompson).

This point of view advocating for the idea of how climate change and its relevant factors are existent, however, has its own weaknesses. For example, many scientists believe many of the climate models used especially by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are rather inaccurate. These scientific critics believe real world climatic change data differs greatly from what is shown in such climate models, arguing that global heating has diminished to a large degree. Such critics have argued that climate models which projected global temperatures from 1980 to 2015 showed increased warming than observed temperatures measured by satellites and weather balloons (“Opposing Views of Climate Change Theory”). This gives way to a potential weakness for those arguing climate change and global warming data/predictions being accurate sources of information as it creates a flaw in statistical data collected by such sources. As further proof shows, scientists such as Roy Spencer from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) argue that observed temperature data from surface and satellite data sets do not show accelerated warming that has been stated by the IPCC’s model (“Opposing Views of Climate Change Theory”).

To fend off such detrimental effects to the Earth and its climatic patterns, many scientists who support the claim of climate change having reliable and evident proof of existence believe efforts should be taken to reverse and prevent the matter. Some of the said effects of climate change, according to scientists, can involve increases in the severity of extreme weather events, declining air quality, and destabilizing natural systems due to an increase of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. Additionally, these scientific critics argue that such climate change effects will be detrimental to human health such as increasing heat-related illnesses, increasing exposure to numerous toxins, and an increase in mental health stress problems. (Luber). Many believe actions to limit and control climate change include the use of renewable energy and focus of creating such renewable energy affordable for individuals and businesses. Thus, the general public will be more inclined to use renewable sources of energy than nonrenewables sources such as oil, coal, and natural gas. 

On the other hand, the opposing view of climate change states its main idea being that climate change is either false, an exaggerated subject, or misinterpreted in many ways. Many scientists with this opposing view believe evidently how the rising of average global temperatures over time cannot be easily measured accurately, detailing strengths withheld in their proposed argument. Other strengths which backup this argument include information such as global satellites showing no warming but a cooling of 0.13 degrees Celsius from 1979 to 1994, and the dropping of Arctic temperatures by 0.88 degrees Celsius over the past fifty years (Gardner). All this information evidently invigorates the scientific claims made by these groups of scientists as such supports their ideologies. Furthermore, scientists agreeing with this point of view argue how instruments used to measure climate change over long durations of time depict inaccurate data and exaggerate the warming of the planet’s atmospheric temperatures. Such scientists state how these suggested models have represented an imprecise representation of such temperature changes, and agree such data is flawed in its observations.

Such a point of view denying that climate change is a rapidly developing process on Earth and within its atmosphere also holds some weaknesses. These weaknesses are rather factual information observed from the other point of view which disagrees with climate change not being real. These observed statistical facts include how burning fossil fuels acquire roughly eighty percent of carbon emissions and thirty percent of methane emissions into the atmosphere. Nonetheless, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports that thirty percent of United States emissions come from the transporting of people and goods (gasoline). Another weakness added onto this point of view is how eighteen percent of all methane gas emissions in the atmosphere originate from waste disposal and such treatment of waste (Kelly). All these statistics represent how the causes of climate change are existent and thus, such effects are existent recognizing the true problem of overall climate change.

All in all, scientists have withheld differing and opposing views on the causes, effects, legitimacy, and existence of climate change for a long duration of time. Although both sides do have their own differing points of view which are evidently supported by statistical data and other forms of hard evidence, a final verdict can be made that although climate change does exist, much of it is blown out of proportion and misinterpreted. For example, much of the data from measuring instruments from the IPCC was reported to be inaccurate and, as a result, incomplete. This gives us one question left unanswered: whether climate change is real or not, how are we humans going to fix our ways to improve our environment and the Earth’s atmospheric quality?

Works Cited

• Butler, Colin. “Climate Change, Health and Existential Risks to Civilization: A Comprehensive Review (1989–2013).” PubMed Central (PMC), 1 Oct. 2018, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6210172.
• Denchak, Melissa. “Fossil Fuels: The Dirty Facts.” NRDC, 29 June 2018, www.nrdc.org/stories/fossil-fuels-dirty-facts#:%7E:text=Fossil%20fuels%20produce%20large%20quantities,quarters%20of%20our%20carbon%20emissions.
• Gardner, Gregory. “Many Climate Change Scientists Do Not Agree That Global Warming Is Happening.” NCBI, 11 Apr. 1998, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1112950.
• Kelly, Joe. “The Top 10 Causes of Global Warming.” Sciencing, 22 Nov. 2019, sciencing.com/the-top-10-causes-of-global-warming-12512484.html.
• Lindsey, Rebecca. “Climate Change: Global Sea Level | NOAA Climate.Gov.” Climate.Gov, 25 Jan. 2021, www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level#:%7E:text=Global%20mean%20sea%20level%20has,of%20seawater%20as%20it%20warms.
• Luber, George. “Climate Change and Human Health.” NCBI, 2009, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2744549.
• “Opposing Views of Climate Change Theory.” Ballotpedia, ballotpedia.org/Opposing_views_of_climate_change_theory. Accessed 9 Apr. 2021.
• Thompson, Lonnie. “Climate Change: The Evidence and Our Options.” NCBI, 2010, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2995507.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.