Discussion Question 8

I found neither of these websites to be very convincing. First, neither is what I would consider a reliable source on climate change. The "Friends of Science" site at least presents itself as more of a scholarly source than the Grist site does, listing a panel of PhD holding members who have published scholarly works about the science behind climate change, while the Grist site is set up more like a blog and does not identify the personal credentials of the authors as readily. Still, both sites simply overwhelm the reader with facts, data, and graphs that come from various government and watchdog organizations. Put simply, when comparing these two sites, it is difficult to come to any conclusion because each side of the debate has counter-evidence to "disprove" the other side's argument. Who I am to distinguish who is telling the "truth"? For the most part, I don't understand the science behind either side's figures, so I'm left feeling like there is simply no consensus or truth to be found.

However, I understand why there is such fierce debate about climate change. If the phenomenon is real and is human-driven (for the record, this is what I believe), it is the most dire environmental problem facing the world as a whole. According to the science on this side of the debate, the state of the world as we know it is changing rapidly for the worse, and we are no longer guaranteed of the planet's ability to support growing future generations. On the other side of the debate, any solution to this problem is extremely costly. It would involve overhauling our current system, which depends so heavily on fossil fuel use, one of the main sources of human carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Certainly, it makes sense to be wary of making such a large sacrifice that could have its own unintended economic and environmental consequences if the phenomenon of global warming isn't real. While I personally believe global warming is caused by humans and is a threat to the health of the planet, I understand why such fierce debate continues about the validity of these claims.