From Pope Francis’ 2015 encyclical to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris in December, global climate change spurs international concern and continues to divide American public opinion despite a consensus among climate scientists.
Climate change is backed by 97 percent or more of climate scientists, who attribute the earth’s warming as “very likely” due to man-made causes, Nova reports. This overwhelming consensus is not shared by the American people, with CNN recently reporting 57 percent of Americans do not think global warming poses a risk to their lifestyle. A YouGov poll sponsored by Fox News found 91 percent of Americans do not consider global warming a serious issue of concern.
While careful to distinguish policy from scientific evidence, many Hillsdale College science faculty said they align with the 97 percent of climate scientists who deem man-made climate change scientifically confirmed.
“If everybody understood the physics and the evidence, the question of the existence of anthropogenic global warming would not be an issue,” Professor of Physics Ken Hayes said. “It’s not a question of belief. This is not a religious issue. It’s a science issue. It’s all been done and it’s all amazingly clear.”
Among the fields of science, analyzing climate change is distinctly a physics question, which Hayes began researching eight years ago and modeled experiments to show the effect of carbon emissions on the planet.
Mark Kalthoff, professor of history and the history of science, said the historical transformation of scientific theory to accepted dogma is not a linear path from ignorance to knowledge. As Copernicus’ heliocentric system and Einstein’s theory of relativity demonstrate great shifts within the scientific community, Kalthoff said today’s consensus on anthropogenic global warming may look different in the future.
“I would not classify myself as a ‘climate change denier,’ as it seems clear that we have evidence pointing to ways that the earth is warming,” Kalthoff said. “But the history of science is rich with warnings about the risks of unguardedly accepting ‘the scientific consensus.’ The ‘consensus’ convictions of scientific communities change. The nature of today’s scientific consensus regarding climate change is not identical to what it was 10 years ago.”
Looking at today’s evidence, Visiting Lecturer of Biology Angie Pytel described the trend of global warming as an upward climb that took off at the time of the industrial revolution, which tells climate scientists that the rising global temperature is a man-made issue.
“As a biologist, I care because of the consequences of gross planetary climate change,” Pytel said.
“Now, within the generation of a human life, you can plant a plant where you couldn’t plant it before. This change we are seeing is definitely aberrant.”
The divergence of opinion between scientists and the public points to what Assistant Professor of Psychology Collin Barnes believes is the overwhelming amount of conflicting data found on the Internet that causes the public to distrust scientists.
“It is always the case that persons interact with data and give them voice,” Barnes said.
Acknowledging that aberrant climate change and crafting policy are two separate spheres — different as Capitol Hill is from a lab station on the Alaskan tundra — is a critical distinction for conversations on climate change.
“What worries me is when we have a physical question and we answer that question one way as a Republican and one way as a Democrat,” said Matthew Young, associate professor of chemistry. “It’s a very negative situation because that question can be addressed and answered through natural science.”
