The debate about whether or not "climate change" exists is something i always grew up with. My Father is a huge skeptic of the idea and i always had to listen to him mock people who were pulling towards methods of "being green" and conserving energy etc.

The reasons that he is so critical about accepting climate change and believing what people say have to do with party affiliation. But also the ideas that we have to cut back on fossil fuel use which is what our economy runs on. Without it we would not be able to produce produce produce at the rate in which we do. It would take extravagant amounts of effort on everyone's part in order to make our economy run on means that did not come from fossil fuels. That is mainly why i believe people like my father refuse to even consider the idea that it is negatively affecting our earth in the manner that it does. That is also why i particularly liked the "How to talk to a climate skeptic" more because of every day life it was much more useful for me! I also enjoyed how every answer was laid out very scientifically and to the point, there were graphs and simple statements that I definitely could use to argue points. It also gave a HUGE variety of topics in which you could look at global warming from. Instead of the same drilled in points of green house gases, warming up and the end. It covered lots of different angles and maybe at one of the angles it could change a person's perspective. So Yes I think that this website is more convincing

Climate Change

There is so much competition centered about the science of climate change for many reasons. The first of these reasons is economics. Validation of climate change means that there will need to be modifications to the current economic system. In an economy that prioritizes growth above all else, this makes climate change seem anti-capitalist to many people. What must happen is a re-prioritization of our goals. Rather than prioritizing more production, we need to prioritize well-being for humans and for the planet.

In addition, people fear climate change's validity because it indicates that we have done something wrong. We don't want to be told that what we are doing is harmful and must be stopped, so we like to pretend that everything is OK. It's time to open our eyes to the science behind global warming and climate change and it is time for us to make a change in our lifestyles.

Evaluating the science is important for understanding the consequences of our actions. We need to look for hard evidence, facts, correlations (while understanding that a correlation is not necessarily a causation), relationships between data, and our impacts on those data. Both of the sites that we looked at this week try to use the scientific data to bolster their arguments. This is important, because arguing without science is unsubstantial.

To evaluate their claims, we need to read what they say. The "Friends of Science" website mostly says that what is happening now is standard for the planet's history, while the "How to talk to a Climate Skeptic" describes the ways that things have been changing. I find the "How to talk to a Climate Skeptic" website to be more convincing, perhaps because I am already of the persuasion that global warming is factual.

Ariel's Blog Post

In a world where one can crunch numbers and create graphs “supporting” almost anything, the study of climate change becomes increasingly riddled with massive amounts of (often contradictory) scientific “evidence.” For those of us, like myself, without much skill in the realm of scientific knowledge, it can get confusing to tell fact apart from fiction. When confronted with two sources (such as those presented to us in this blog question), that both appear legitimate but provide contradictory information, it is easy to get lost in the shuffle of “scientific” debate. In addition, in a society where political action may be taken or is in the process of becoming policy, some individuals begin to view their freedom as being compromised in the name of eco-friendly policies. This arguably results in fierce competition and competing interests around the science of climate change.

Admittedly, I’m not one for science. I most likely will never have the skill to intelligently enter into a heated scientific debate. However, climate change and environmental issues still stir me, even if I’m unable to scientifically grasp the exact nature of the problem. Why is this so? Because I realize that everything has some sort of a consequence. I don’t believe that anything just happens without causing something else, either positive or negative, to happen as a result. Thus, regardless of the scientific debate, it remains clear to me that our intense consumption and reliance on fossil fuel must be having some consequence. For me, my desire to reduce climate change and cultivate a more positive impact on the environment doesn’t need to be rooted in specific scientific information. Regardless of how fancy a chart you can make, it’s hard to miss the thick black smoke billowing out of the tailpipe a car.

I had a really hard time with this assignment because there are many times when i have had a thrilling experience with the natural world. For example just walking to school, my favorite season is fall because of the smell, colors and overall feeling. There are those perfect days when you are outside the temperature feels exactly how you want it to and everything is just making sense. So I feel a connection to the non-human world almost everyday. But there is one particular activity that i think really allows you to appreciate nature at it's finest and that is camping. My family has gone camping since i was a little girl and it is an activity that i still do today on my own. However there is one particular trip that was especially challenging and invasive in terms of experiencing the world around us. A huge group of about 10 of my family members decided to take a 4 day trip camping on the boundary waters in MN. This involved canoeing for 3 miles, hiking for 1 mile and canoeing for another mile before reaching out camp site. The canoeing was tough, the hiking was even more tough and the last mile was bliss. But all of these activity really allowed me to see the natural state of things. When i was resting in the canoe as we floated along I could lay back and look at the sky and everything in it. when we were hiking my uncle would stop us periodically and have us look at little things like beaver homes and certain birds. Also at the camp site my cousins took me to a cliff that we could jump off of into the water. It was an overall amazing experience that really allowed me to see all the advantages of having a natural area. Saving nature is definitely something we should concern ourselves with not only because it is beautiful but because it does a lot to ground an individual. People can get caught up in the busy hustle of everyday life but taking time to sit back and merely look outside can really refresh you. I think at least. However not only from a personal perspective but a survival aspect as well. Frankly we need this earth and all of the natural ecosystems, inhabitants, resources in it to keep going. I think there are hundreds of different perspectives that you could look at it and still find a reason to keep nature healthy and prosperous.

Discussion Question 7

The most enchanting experience I've had with the non-human world occurred during my trip to Machu Picchu two summers ago.  Although Machu Picchu is a remnant of a past human civilization, the Incas, it was still a moving experience in terms of the nature I was surrounded by during my time there.  I was moved by the imposing mountains that surrounded this landmark, which the Incas worshipped as gods. In fact, Machu Picchu means "old mountain," one of two mountains, the other Huayna Picchu, meaning "young mountain," that demarcate the bounds of this ancient settlement. In these mountains and the surrounding nature, the Incas found shapes of pumas, condors, and serpents, their most holy and common animals, and I imagined what this place must have been like when the Incas inhabited it.  I took many pictures of the diverse wildlife still common at Machu Picchu, including lizards, birds, and even wild chinchillas. Llamas roamed free throughout the grounds.  I took a little adventure down the side of one of the hills, enjoying the flora and fauna away from any other tourists visiting the site.  The mountainside was silent and still, and I looked out over the same earth the Incas had seen hundreds of years ago with a sense of awe.  It made me feel very small in the world, and it made the world seem so ancient and powerful.  I thought about how, after the site was abandoned hundreds of years ago, it was swallowed up by the jungle, covered in vines and greenery, its stones and terraces made a part of the earth again.  In short, there has been no experience so moving for me as my visit to Machu Picchu, a trip I recommend to all.

Huayna Picchu

Machu Picchu

The Shape of a Condor Between Two Mountains

Lizard

Llama

Wild Chinchilla

Saving nature is certainly something we should concern ourselves with.  My personal motivation is purely a love of nature.  I would hate to not be able to experience the awe of the majesties provided by the earth.  There are so many gorgeous, tranquil, moving sites I have yet to experience-- the icebergs of Patagonia, tropical rainforests including the Amazon, the Himalayan mountains, etc.  For me, it would be a tragedy for these sites to either disappear or be degraded.  But there are other, more "practical," reasons for preserving nature as well.  We need it to survive.  It provides us with so many resources, so many medical treatments.  It provides the biodiversity in ecosystems that makes this planet unique from all the others that have so far been discovered.  Our climate hangs in a delicate balance, and we need to preserve forests, icebergs, and mountain ice caps to maintain the health of the planet we wish to continue inhabiting.  Conservation, therefore, is a task well worth taking up.

Matthew's Post

The most enchanting experience I've had with the non-human world happened at a church camp that I used to go to. One of the things we did every year was sit alone in the woods and think. To be surrounded by nature, listening to the ocean, was a very unique experience. I felt separate from everybody else in my group, focused on where I was and what was I my general vicinity.

Saving nature is very important. I feel like a lot of the arguments made for preserving forests, for example, are economic. People say we need to preserve them so there will be wood to use in the future. I think differently. I think that ethically, we need to preserve Earth because it is not a planet for humans, it is a planet for all life. When we abuse the planet, we are robbing it and other plants and animals of what is theirs. Preserving nature is important because it is not ours to destroy. Rather than using the natural world, we should experience it an enjoy it.

Ariel's Blog Post

I spent a long time trying to choose the most thrilling, magical, and enchanting encounter I’ve had with the non-human world. I finally decided upon this encounter:

A few years ago, my family decided to go on a cruise to Alaska. Our trip was almost at its close, and my family was excited to have a full day at sea so we could finally sleep in late. However, the ship’s captain came over the loudspeaker at 5 AM, saying that we would enter Tracy Arm Fjord in about an hour. He was alerting us that there is a beautiful glacier there, and that it would be worth all crowding onto the ship’s deck to see it.

Reluctantly, I got dressed and went outside with my family. As we were a large cruise ship, we made a nerve-wracking trip between two mountains. Suddenly, we were in a fairly wide fjord. In front of us was a small island. A naturalist came over the loudspeaker to explain that a man lives on this island, secluded from the rest of the world. He tries to live very simply, making his way into town only twice a year to buy some needed goods. He spends the rest of his time attempting to live in a sustainable manner on this small island.

We continued on, and approached a massive glacier. It is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen. A photograph (although below) truly does not do it justice. The naturalist again came on the loudspeaker to discuss the glacier with us. The land mass on which the glacier was located was a dark brown. However, closer to the glacier, this land mass turned light brown. The naturalist explained that this color difference was a result of the fact that the glacier is melting.

This naturally leads me into a discussion of whether or not we should concern ourselves with “saving nature.” I chose this example in part because it depicts two ends of the spectrum: this secluded, beautiful fjord and our massive cruise ship (complete with an iceberg-crusher built into its bow). This made me question whether or not it is best to be a preservationist. One the one hand, would I care about climate change if I hadn’t seen this glacier? To a certain extent, yes. On the other hand, I would not have a full appreciation of the issue. So I suppose my answer is yes. Of course I want to save nature. On the other hand, I question what exactly that means, and how we can actually empower individuals to do that in a logical manner— or at least without a massive iceberg crusher.