I'm not denying that climate change could be a legitimate issue. NASA's research suggests that "human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet". There are, however, different aspects of scientific analysis and false news to take into consideration.
Climate change can be defined simply as a change in global patterns caused by the increased amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. This is immanent; it is where the blame is placed that concerns me.
In theory, several factors can contribute to climate change, meaning anything that releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This includes (but is not limited to) fossil fuels, volcanic eruptions, variability in solar activity, ocean- atmosphere exchange, and plant and animal respiration.
Did you catch the odd one out? Bingo! Fossil fuels; AKA the ultimate global warming buzz word, Why do fossil fuels stand out and why do they get such a bad wrap? They are the only non-natural culprits of climate change listed. This is where blame can easily be placed because it is not 'mother nature's' fault, but ours.
Since the industrial revolution in 1750, man's activities have contributed greatly to the addition of heat- trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. I have come to terms with this concept but what still irritates me the way people choose to approach this issue.
The majority of those concerned about the environment think human life is a disease that plagues the earth, making it a horrible place to live in. The truth is, the earth was made for us to temporarily reside in and if we can not make that work, that is pathetic.
A substantial amount of people fail to live by that of the Creation Mandate: a command God has given us in Genesis to practice proper dominion over the earth. Everyone needs to be taught that we need to treat the earth with a high regard out of respect for it's creator. Just as you would leave your guest room in an orderly fashion, you should leave your temporary home as a better place than it was before.
So, instead of casting blame on everyone but ourselves, how should we get out of this mess as a whole? Instead of worrying about melting icecaps in the arctic, you can actually make a change by recycling, re-purposing items, only driving when necessary, using high-efficiency appliances, insulating your home, and planting a tree which will soak up carbon from the atmosphere. Another thing worth your time is researching and implementing renewable energy sources that will work for your home.
What the heck does this have to do with Scott Pruitt being head of the EPA? It all boils down to an issue in the hearts of all people, not particularly the environment. We choose to incriminate individuals, such as Pruitt, who question the legitimacy of climate change. Instead, we should realize we all play a huge role in environmental protection and simply because his beliefs differ from ours, does not give us right to condemn him; but rather, let this provide us with the epiphany that we need to all start making individual, environmentally friendly changes.
The reason I am weary of the Washington Post's take on the subject is their use of the term "settled science" Science is, by definition, always changing because new studies are constantly being conducted. Please make it a point to approach all articles claiming their theories are 'set in stone' with a high level of skepticism because to completely disregard any different viewpoints on a topic is often a clear sign ignorance.
Remember that the characters who tell you climate change is '100% settled' are the same type of people that mocked Christopher Columbus for thinking the earth is round, punished citizens of ancient Greece for theorizing that the earth was made up of more than four elements, and laughed at anyone who suggested Hillary would lose the 2016 election. Never let anyone bring your curiosity to a close.
No comments:
Post a Comment