Climate Of Doubt

Climate of Doubt

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of the Institution]

Introduction

In the last few decades, the overall temperature of the world is rising at an alarming rate. Scientists are divided into two groups over this hot issue. Majority of them believe that human-induced factors are responsible behind global warming, while some of them denied this perspective. They believe that climate change is a natural thing and humans have no authority over it. The Climate of Doubt from Frontline demonstrates that global climate change has become politically inconvenient over time. It reveals the divergence of political leaders from their initial description of climate change. It is notable to mention that Democrats and Republicans, in the election of 2008, emphasize over the serious issue of global warming that our nation faced. However, this particular issue evaporated as a political issue by 2012. Here, the focus is to determine the reality behind global climate change.

Discussion

Climate of Doubt by Frontline investigates the organizations that took climate change off the table of political discourse despite challenging the science. The apparent scientific, political, and social consensus about climate change are demonstrated in this specific video. From 2007 to 2009, the majority of prominent politicians and party presidential candidates claimed that global warming is a major issue. They believe that the burning of fossil fuel in the industries and transportation sector is responsible for global warming. In the past few decades, humans have used an extensive amount of fossil fuels for energy. Carbon dioxide emission from burning fossil fuels goes into the atmosphere, where they get trapped and heated up to raise the overall temperature of the earth. Coral Davenport, energy and environment correspondent, in this video states that climate change is the biggest political and economic problem, but it’s not on the American political radar. Climate of Doubt proclaims that many stakeholders whose business depends upon fossil fuels, are denying climate change. These stakeholders spend a lot of money to revolve fake news about the existence of climate change. It is a known fact that cold days have become less common, while hot days have become more common around the world. Regardless of the weather conditions in the mid-twenty-first century, extremely hot days are now more likely to occur.

It is notified in the video that stakeholders of fossil fuel businesses are fooling themselves along with public regarding climate change. Majority of scientists believe that global warming is happening, but still, these stakeholders are spending money on tremendous campaigns to alter the thinking of people about global warming. The Americans for Prosperity and the Heartland Institute claim that climate change is not real. Consequently, they framed scientists and politicians who are not agree with global warming. Politicians like Newt Gingrinch and Mitt Romney state that ‘the science on climate change is inconclusive.’ It is noteworthy to mention that these politicians in the past claimed that global warming is a threatening situation and the government must address this issue as soon as possible. John Heckenberry is an American journalist and author who asks two state senators of North Carolina about climate change. These senators have sponsored legislation to remove climate change from consideration. They believe that climate change is a natural thing and human cannot handle or alter it. They state that they sponsored legislation to remove climate change by viewing it from a common sense standpoint.

Bill McKibben is an environmentalist, who states that ‘climate change has real consequences for us.’ Globally, sea level is rising and the reason behind this is human-induced climate change. The glaciers are melting at an alarming rate as climate change has changed the course of currents. Politicians are gaining a major amount of profit from fossil fuels. That’s why they do not want to accept the reality of climate change. They do not want to put their profits at risk by claiming climate change. Even President-elect Obama called climate change a matter of urgency in 2008. However, in 2012, he talks meaningfully about climate change. The United States has suffered massive wildfires, severe droughts, and record-breaking heat in the past few years. Wealthy ideologue donors and fossil fuel companies have funded organizations to undermine public understanding by waging war against climate scientists and climate science. They even funded these organizations to develop meaningful climate policy. Climate of Doubt demonstrates the funding that powers the climate counter-movement in the name of anti-regulation, free market, small government causes. Moreover, the majority funders of the skeptic movement are ideologically driven foundations that are anxious about conventional worldviews and values.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, Climate of Doubt describes organizations and people behind the reversal movement of climate change. Politicians and businesses are spending millions of dollars to attack climate science and climate scientists. The perspectives and viewpoint of people are being altered through paid commercial and campaigns against climate change. I believe that climate change is real as there are many indicators that claim its existence. Climate of Doubt is a masterpiece by Frontline to create awareness regarding climate change and global warming. It exposes politicians and stakeholders, who do not want people to accept the reality of climate change as it might cause risk to their fossil fuel’s business. Climate of Doubt demonstrates that climate change is real and governments need to keep their conservative views and personal interest aside. Efforts should be made to replace fossil fuel energy with renewable energy, which is environment-friendly as it does not emit carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.