It is surprising that climate change was ranked the last in the list of priorities immediately after President Barrack Obama took over as the president of the United States (Gertner par.1).
In addition, a lot of research has been carried out in the recent past to investigate various government interests such as economic growth and healthcare. However, limited funding on climate change research studies is a chronic challenge.
Most of the initiatives started by the federal government in the US do not traverse far in terms of attaining the set goals.
As a human race, we should not be boasting of dozens of research activities that target to boost our economies while we forget to address some of the most salient climate change issues. Most of the funds that are usually meant for undertaking research in climate change are often diverted to other projects.
A common argument by some of the top political class is that social science research is the best solution for addressing environmental issues. Opponents of climate change research studies argue that social science research is capable of alleviating pollution in our environment.
We sincerely need to improve climate models. The latter cannot be achieved if adequate funding is not set aside for research studies. We have reached a point whereby aggressive and insurgent opinions are not required. To some extent, our planet and the entire ecosystem are gradually changing.
The decision scientists are merely complicating a very straightforward issue that deals with conservation of the environment. Why is it so difficult to minimize the use of fossil fuels in industrial production? There are several options of clean energy resources that governments across the world can use.
Moreover, international treaties or agreements and domestic regulations can still be used to alleviate the threats of climate change. Since the negative climate change has been caused by disruptive human behavior, the same human behavior can be corrected in order to minimize the negative effects of our changing climate (Gertner par.4).
It is evident that evidence and action have not been merged ever since the debate on climate change began. The fifth assessment report was released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in September 2013 (Quesne par. 5).
The report was comprised of massive evidence put together from over 90,000 publications. Moreover, fifty two countries took part in the survey that was used to compile the report. A total of 1089 reviewers also participated in analyzing and reviewing the gathered data (Quesne par. 5).
From the assessment reports obtained from IPCC, it was unanimously concluded that climate change cannot be debated since it is a reality that governments must confront with unity.
It is indeed factual that an unequivocal approach should be taken when confronting the issues of global warming and climate change. According to the report, human beings have been the main agents of climate change ever since the onset of the twentieth century.
The report further suggests that climate change can only be curtailed through substantial and sustained alleviation of harmful gaseous emissions (Quesne par. 6).
The key policy makers in the global arena should redirect the development concerns towards action on climate change. A lot of evidence that has already been availed should be put into action.
Human life may eventually be rendered useless if the negative impacts of climate change are not addressed. The extreme weather events such as typhoons, hurricanes and tornados can claim thousands of lives within a short time.
Works Cited
Gertner, Jon. Why Isn’t the Brain Green? 9 Apr. 2009. Web.
Quesne, Felicity. In-depth: the psychological and social roots of climate change skepticism. 7 Jan. 2014. Web.