Discussion #8

Upon viewing the "Friends of Science" website, I was very surprised to read that in the 'about us' section the website claims the organization's membership is "comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmosphere scientists, engineers, and other professionals." Quite frankly, I don't understand how such professionals and scientists could reach the conclusions that the website displays.

Although this site gives some charts and time lines, I feel like they don't put the data into perspective or context. One example is the "It's been hotter" link where they show a graph of fluctuations in the climate throughout history. While this is true, it doesn't negate the strong possibility of global warming or make the evidence that correlates the most recent changes with human activity illegitimate. In one of the videos featured on the website a scientist claims that the sun is one reason for climate change. This is repeated on several parts of the site and almost makes it seem like there's no space for other possibilities. Sure, the pattern of the sun may have something to do with it, but does that mean there's no chance that our lifestyles are also contributing?

My first inclination in addressing the question of "Why is there such fierce competition around the science of climate change?" was to turn to the politicization and stigma of such words as "environmentalist," which has inevitable become associated with being a liberal. And, as we discussed in class today, a good republican can't be an environmentalist or believe in climate change. Now that the terms have such a political connotation, the debate on global warming doesn't even seem to be on the status of the planet, but rather on validating and assuming one's political identity.

I think the best way to make sense of these competing websites is by trying to take the information they give us and look at it as part of a system or in the context of the bigger picture. As such, I find the second website, "How to talk to a climate skeptic" more convincing." Almost all of the articles presented on the site have links to other sources of information such as charts, graphs, reports, and documents from many other organizations. The other reason I probably find this site more convincing is because it aligns more with my thoughts and what I believe to be true. The witty title of the series doesn't hurt either.