My position on climate change is the pro side; this argues that climate change is as a result of human activities such as the use of fossil fuels. As human activities increase, the climate changes across the world causing drought, stronger storms, rising sea levels, sea ice loss, and global warming among many more other adverse effects. There are two specific ways in which the people I am addressing differs from my position on climate change. The 1st way is that one group of people say that climate change occurs as a result of natural processes such as ocean currents and sun heat fluctuations. According to this group of people, human-caused global climate change is based on misleading science, faulty climate models and questionable measurements. The 2nd way in which other people are differing with me is by saying that climate change is caused by an equal combination of both human activity and the environment. In the 2012 Purdue University survey, human activity alone was challenged creating climate change. The study suggested that both environmental factors and human activities are responsible for the change in climate. In the year 2014, a group of scientists in America also challenged human activity in causing climate change.
The common stance in this discussion is that climatic change is a scientific fact and increasingly a lived human experience. Every individual agrees that there has been a climatic change over the last several years. This has been experienced from the old ages of ice melt between 26000 to 13000 years ago. Extreme cold temperatures have also been encountered in between 1650 and 1850. Everyone across the globe has experienced the changing global weather patterns as a result of increased temperatures, heat waves issues, and food spoils among many more other problems (Borofsky, 2005). Climate change has affected a lot of people across the world; It is neither an integral part of how we shape our social practice nor a vital cultural norm that acts as a constraint to our behavior. We all agree that climate change signifiers are part of the problem today. We are supposed to see ourselves in the hockey sticks graphs, plaintive polar bears and melting ice; however, most of us today don’t see that. A lot of errors have been observed in the way the ideology of climate change has been communicated. The communication today has been based on both the systematic nature and human nature of the challenge.
What is climate change and by extension on how we should mobilize a collective response to remain a problematic vision of the science translating to a general injunction to solve the problem. The most important economic, cultural and political and ethical questions have been left to the policy makers as if they are equipped for such tasks. As argued in various reports today, the leading cause and impacts of this inertia is that even the individuals who accept the facts of climate change struggle to see themselves as part of the solution. The community response has lacked personal qualities such as vision, tenacity, honesty, and passion that the problem demands of us (Spence, 2012). In debates about climate change, framing has become a buzzword, and it cannot keep fossil fuels in the ground by itself. We all need a way speaking and thinking that capture the fact that climate change is a unique collective action issue that is implicated in every facet of life. We, therefore, need to collectively work together on a climate change project that benefits the broader community.
Borofsky, R., & Albert, B. (2005). Yanomami: The fierce controversy and what we can learn from it (Vol. 12). Univ of California Press.
Spence, A., Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. (2012). The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(6), 957-972.