Get Rich or Die Trying
Essay by rmatazin • December 7, 2011 • Essay • 1,104 Words (5 Pages) • 1,997 Views
Get Rich or Die Trying
Scientists have been warning for years that manmade pollutants are harming the atmosphere, but this problem is continuously overlooked. Global warming is the gradual increase in the overall temperature of the earth's atmosphere due to the greenhouse effect caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants. Our factories, cars, hairsprays, etcetera are emitting harmful pollutants into the ozone and harming the planet we live on. Climate change is a term used related to global warming. It is defined by the changing in temperature of a specific region due to human activity. Human beings share the world we live in and must be concerned for it's future. Not only for an individuals sake, but for the continuing cycle of the human race.
These two terms, global warming and climate change, are apart of the studies of climate scientists. Climate science is currently trying to prove that either mankind is indeed killing the planet they inhabit, or that it is all exaggerated. While it may seem that the evidence is right in front of our eyes, climate science has taken a very political turn. Two writers have expressed both sides of this debate.
Paul Krugman, author of "The Truth, Still Inconvenient" discusses just this issue. Krugman gives the example of Professor Muller of Berkely, who was once one of these nonbelievers. He was noted stating that Al Gore, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work with climate change, was nothing but an exaggerator. Professor Muller decided to start the Berkely Earth Surface Temperature Project to prove that this was all a hoax. Republicans invited him to testify his findings at a Congressional Hearing. However once it was evident that his findings were not going to back the nonbelievers, they dismissed Muller from the hearing. Krugman also discusses the illegitimate witnesses at the hearing and their off-the-wall testimonies. A lawyer, one of these "expertise witnesses", claimed that "E.P.A. can't declare that greenhouse gas emissions are a health threat, because these emissions have been rising for a century, but public health has also improved over the same period". This lawyer is implying that it is okay to harm the planet and its millions inhabitants because they will only adapt. Later, Krugman says, "...if you are going to assert that [the scientists] are in fact wrong, you have a moral responsibility to approach the topic with high seriousness and an open mind" (Krugman). Therefore, if you are going to deny such a threatening issue, you must have reasoning and be absolutely positive that there will be no consequence. There are many lives at risk.
Thomas Sowell defends the nonbelievers in his article "The Science Mantra". Sowell believes that the self-proclaimed believers are hiding and destructing the evidence that proves global warming a myth in order to forward their own agendas and make money. He gives the example of an intercepted email from the Climate Research Unit in England. It urged deleting emails regarding climate change. Sowell claims
...
...