The world has been experiencing some threatening environmental changes. Most of these environmental risks have stalled economies worldwide and caused distraction on productivity. People’s lifestyles have been distracted and some have even been forced to flee from their original residence. In 2013, the World Economic Forum prepared a global risks report in which it vividly presented the environmental horrors as they were occurring in the world and their impacts.
In the survey that involved the participation of over 1000 environmental experts, it was observed that the global environmental risks do not respect national borders. It was further reported that following the said risks there was a collision between environment and economies of the world. The experts made a wake call on the world economies to allocate adequate resources to help mitigate the rising risks brought about by severe weather events. They warned that failing to act fast global prosperity for future generations could be threatened (Maibach et al 2015).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Some of the freighting environment risks listed by the World Economic Forum include failing to adopt to climate change and incurable pollution in which contamination is feared could be in high levels that it threatens the ecosystems, social stability, health outcomes, and economic development. There is also the risk of antibiotic- resistant bacteria where deadly bacteria are growing resistant to antibiotics and this has led to spread of diseases of which some are now hard to treat. Land and waterways mismanagement has led to deforestation, waterways diversion and risky mineral extraction that lead to devastating ecosystems and risks to lives. Poorly planned cities and ballooning city population are causing environmental dangers. Other listed risks include persistent extreme weather, rising greenhouse emissions, species exploitation and unprecedented geophysical destruction. This Paper tries to highlight the environmental risks associated with global warming and its resultant effects.
There have been vested interests and political agents some of which have been acceptance of the reality and consequences of global warming. Some scientists and environmental scholars are in full acceptance that global warming is a universal threat to humankind and is now impacting world economies and lives of the people. On the other hand, there are experts who have been denial of global warming. Such observation cites that there is a discrepancy with the researches and opinions on global warming. This paper will be using two articles that highlight differing opinions on global warming: Is Global Warming Harmful to Human Race? And Petroleum and Propaganda: The Anatomy ofthe Global Warming Denial Industry
According to Maibach et al (2015) global warming is a real environmental threat and is causing negative consequences to human health. The article which is in acceptance of global warming menace highlights that “ Americans report general sense that global warming can be harmful to health but relatively few understand the types of harm it causes or who is most likely to be affected.” The article claims that this has led to a dissatisfying support for expanded public health response. There is a call that primary care physicians and public health officials should put more effort in educating the public about the health implications of climate change (Maibach et al 2015).
Statistically, Maibach and his team demonstrated that 61% of Americans had not given a serious thought on the effects of global warming to their health. 64% of the respondents who participated in the survey, accepted that global warming is happening and is having negative impact to people’s health (Maibach et al 2015). The respondents claimed there are groups that are more prone to suffer health complications than others as a result of global warming. There was a general call that the government should work more in effort to protect against health harms caused by global warming; the respondents observed the government response to global warming is inadequate.
The Maibach (2015) article highlights the players who have been in the forefront of teaching the public about global warming and its effect on people’s health as the local public health department, the Center for Disease control and prevention and the World Health organization (Maibach et al 2015). The article was prepared subsequently after a survey researching on general attitudes and beliefs about global warming. Some of the factors that were tested in the survey include affective assessment of health effects, vulnerable populations, and specific health conditions, perceived risks and support for government response.
Farley (2012)on his article ‘Petroleum and Propaganda’ tries to examine John Powell’s belief that quotes “remarkable paradox: among climate scientists, there is a near-unanimous consensus that global warming occurring now.” There is an observation that the belief and attitude on global warming are human made and denies there will be “severe environmental problems if humanity continues business as usual”. Observing that only half of us public are in agreement with climate scientists who concur that there is in fact a horror posed by global warming. This is seen as an enormous discrepancy and goes on to question the reality of global warming (Farley, 2012).
Powell’s denial, which asserts, “we are witnessing the most vicious, and so far most successful, attack on science in history” is examined in the Farley article. Though his denial might not have been tested and proved, it is good to give it a second thought. He has extensive knowledge in science as he has a doctorate in geochemistry and has been teaching science for over twenty years. He has also been on president in three different colleges and has served in National science board for many years. Therefore he has grounds to argue on the global warming issue. Powell is reported to be in support of the ExxonMobil funding for global warming denial (Farley, 2012). The Powell ideology might be used to represent the attitude of global warming denial, which has been supported by oil companies, and the fossil fuel industry and its adaptations a sincere belief or this industry.
Comparison of articles on global warming
The Powell belief is a contrast of the Maibach article, it claims the belief on global warming is human made and goes on to deny that it is actually happening. It further goes on to say a consensus on the agreement that global warming is happening is an attack of science. Though the article does not provide how it arrived on the basis to deny global warming it sounds shallow and opinionated. The Maibach report is well founded because it conducts a scientific survey on the population on its awareness on occurrence of global warming and its eventual implication on people’s health; this is more substantial and can be adopted. The Powell denial can be seen to loose consistency because despite supporting ExxonMobil funding on denial of global warming, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) failed on its mandate (Farley, 2012). It was being steered by ExxonMobil and other leaders in the fossil fuel industry in denying climate change, which included funding it. The coalition was rendered ineffective when some of its members left and lost lawsuits on different occasions and was forced to pay massive damages. The leftists said it was too risky to be publicly identified with global-warming denial: the GCC was disbanded in 2001(Farley, 2012).
Conclusion
Therefore being in denial of global warming is being illogical, science have provided enough evidence that it’s real and happening. The health implication confirms that global warming is happening and has direct implications to human life. Researchers have confirmed it’s a threat and therefore there is need for all involved parties to come together to mitigate the risks brought about by global warming.
References
Farley, J.W.,(2012) Pertoleum Propaganda: the anatomy of the global warming denial industry. Monthly Review . Retrieved from https://monthlyreview.org/2012/05/01/petroleum-and-propaganda\
Maibach E., et al (2015) is global warming harmful to human health? Climate Change Communication.retrived from
http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/do-americans-understand-that-global-warming-is-harmful-to-human-health/
