Introduction
Climate change prediction is highly debated, with conflicting opinions regarding its realism. There are various aspects that indicate whether the assumptions are real or not. These features include checking scientific reports, climatic change effects, and forecasts based on weak datasets. While the use of biased environment models facilitates alarmist propaganda, scientific harmony and reports, together with the impacts of weather change, affirm that climatic shift predictions are based on technical reality.
Scientific Consensus
One of the critical reasons for viewing climate change as a scientific reality is the consensus among climate scientists. The fifth and sixth assessment reports conducted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) posit that human activities are the leading cause of global warming, observing the phenomena since the mid-20th century and affirming their undeniable impact on climate change (Lynas, Houlton & Perry 2021, p. 6). The IPCC is an organization consisting of thousands of scientists worldwide, and they believe that human activities are driving global warming. Its comprehensive assessments offer a rigorous examination of scientific evidence, affirming that the Earth’s climate undeniably changes due to human-induced factors, establishing a foundation for accepting scientifically-valid climate change predictions. Thus, the agreement among many scientists, supported by the IPCC’s comprehensive assessments, establishes a strong foundation for accepting climate change as a scientifically-valid reality.
For writing your paper, these links will be helpful:
Observed Impacts
The observed impacts of climate change solidify the predictions as a scientific reality. For example, climate change is already influencing cultural heritage sites through noticeable alterations in temperature, rainfall, humidity, wind strength, sea levels, and occurrences of extreme events (Sesana et al. 2021, p. 1). In this case, weather change, with tangible effects on cultural and historical sites, is a real issue demanding attention and action. These impacts align with estimates made by climate scientists, indicating a clear cause-and-effect relationship between human activities, rising greenhouse gas emissions, and the resulting impacts on the Earth’s systems. Hence, the observed impacts on cultural sites, including changes in climate variables, provide tangible proof supporting weather change as a scientific reality.
Exaggerated Climate Predictions
However, some people believe that incorrect climate models and datasets render the predictions as sensationalized propaganda. For instance, if global climate data collections are used without caution and deep analysis, they can significantly impact the modeling of treeline species in remote high-altitude regions, such as the Himalayas (Bobrowski, Weidinger & Schickhoff 2021, p. 16). If the underlying data used to create climate models are faulty or biased, it can impact the accuracy of predictions related to specific ecological phenomena, making them exaggerated. These inflated estimates serve as fear-mongering tactics, leading to unnecessary panic and misguided policy decisions that may have adverse economic consequences. Therefore, inaccurate models and data can distort climate change predictions, leading to biases and propaganda, hyperbolic estimates, unnecessary panic, and misguided policies.
Conclusion
Scientific agreement and IPCC reports confirm climate change as a scientifically-valid truth. Additionally, observed impacts on cultural heritage sites provide evidence of empirical certainty. However, caution is necessary to avoid exaggerated predictions driven by incorrect models, which can promote alarmist propaganda. This global challenge can be addressed effectively by recognizing the systematic basis of climate change while exercising prudence.
Reference List
Bobrowski, M, Weidinger, J & Schickhoff, U 2021, ‘Is new always better? Frontiers in global climate datasets for modeling treeline species in the Himalayas’, Atmosphere, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1–22, viewed 17 July 2023, DOI: 10.3390/atmos12050543.
Lynas, M, Houlton, BZ & Perry, S 2021, ‘Greater than 99% consensus on human-caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature’, Environmental Research Letters, vol. 16, no. 11, pp. 1–8, viewed 17 July 2023, DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966.
Sesana, E, Gagnon, AS, Ciantelli, C, Cassar, J & Hughes, JJ 2021, ‘Climate change impacts on cultural heritage: A literature review’, Wires Climate Change, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1–29, viewed 17 July 2023, DOI: 10.1002/wcc.710.