prof. e.

Mass Communication, [multi]media, methodology and much, much more!

Climate Change Getting the Cold Shoulder

Posted by prof e on February 13, 2011

Early last year I wrote about the PR problem facing the global warming community. As I noted then, public interest in efforts to address global warming has fallen dramatically from earlier times when Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth was perceived as, well, truth.

Much has changed since then, including a global recession that has taken the edge off of long-term efforts to avert possible or probable ecological disaster. Ask an out-of-work environmentalists about climate change and you may find that he is much more focused on finding a short-term solution to his economic hardship.

Another setback for the movement was the “climategate” scandal in which stolen emails suggested that climate scientists were hiding contrary data in an attempt to prop up their theories. This fall from grace was too much for some climate-change supporters who jumped ship and joined the ranks of skeptics.

Thirdly, the fact that Europe and the US have experienced a colder-than-normal winter with record snowfalls in the mid-west and east coast hasn’t exactly helped the climate change cause.

In light of the set-backs, those who want to keep climate change front and center are struggling to promote their cause.  A recent article in Der Spiegel highlights the failure of climate change advocates to find a compelling visual or spokesperson to make their case. And without a compelling hook, the climate change story has moved off the front page. (That’s a newspaper metaphor for those of you under the age of 45 who don’t read newspapers.) To try to get the story back in the limelight, climate change evangelists are resorting to marketing tricks like those mentioned in the Der Spiegel piece.

Things may change…actually, they always do. Perhaps they’ll find a compelling narrative that renews interest and concern on the part of the public. But for now, the climate change story is a hard sell to a jaded public that is significantly more interested in short term comfort and the latest tabloid gossip than a far-off environmental nightmare that may, or may not, be headed our way.

Advertisements

26 Responses to “Climate Change Getting the Cold Shoulder”

  1. Those articles as well as your analysis sums everything up…The current ignorance to hard, factual, scientific evidence as well as our current economic unraveling, not only as a nation, but globally has provided an ample 1,2 punch against mobilizing people toward making the necessary changes to reduce their eco-fingerprint so to speak.

    This problem of denial is multi-layered..it stems from ignorance and dis-belief yes, but also is rooted in political stances and even in some cases spiritual beliefs. Those are two huge factors that quite usually are the most ingrained within a person and harder to reverse, thus making the prospect of raising awareness for this very real problem that much more testy. We’d be wise to get on that however, because if we are to somehow mitigate the changing climate and it’s subsequent effects on our environs, it’d be wise to begin, like, immediately.

    I tip my hat to anyone who has purchased a gas/electric hybrid vehicle, or consciously made choices to re-work their lifestyles to reduce the amount of heating or cooling they use in their home, or uses CFL light bulbs, or has started washing their clothes in only cold water, or has planted a tree or started a home garden or whatever to try and make a difference..I think that’s really worthy and probably the best way to encourage others to conserve and make more responsible decisions about the environment. Maybe the way to turn the tide of silly and frankly offending reluctance to believe in global warming is to sort of make being less of an energy wasting human sort of trendy.

  2. Ronnie said

    It seems right-leaning thinkers prefer the term Climate Change and left-leaning thinkers prefer Global Warming as their banner slogan. Calling warming trends “climate change” makes the debate less foreboding because, after all, any idiot can see that the weather changes cyclically, God likes changing the weather on us. On the other hand, calling rising temperatures “Global Warming” conjures images of scorching desertification, and really thirsty Ethiopians who were jilted by Western Civilization’s greed.

    Meteorologists (your local Republican weatherman), who are narrowly trained scientists at best, are quickly cited as credible experts with dissenting views; they argue that Global Warming is a lefty-treehugger-hoax designed to impose needless regulation on energy producers. On the other hand, leftists trumpet data collected from actual field researchers to bring attention to their relative causes. Since the overall issue is now so overly politicized, it’s easy to see that sheepish people have been corralled onto one side of the fence or other.

    Whether your a denier or believer makes no difference. It’s probably already too late (so says the cynic). Evidence suggests that prior to mass reliance upon fossil resources, the human population on Earth capped at approx 1.5 billion souls. With the discovery and industrialization of petroleum based markets at the start of 20th century, human population multiplied exponentially to reach our present level of just under 6.5 billion. In 50 years, give or take a decade, humans will have doubled to over 12 billion people. People are the issue, not the weather.

    No alternative fuels (bio-diesel, electric, or hydrogen technology) are feasible alternatives to fossil derived energy sources. There are no new technologies that can be industrialized to the degree of oil and other fossil resources. The only way for countries to produce and sustain the sorts of economic wealth and human civilization attained through industrialization is to burn fossil fuel. The only way for people to live and breed as they do now is to consume dinosaurs.

    People who use politicized Global Warming and Climate Change arguments are only justifying their own existences. Lefty tree huggers pretend concerns for the environment when they tout the development of bio-fuels (corn gasoline) as an Earth saving alternative, but they’re real interests lie in capitalizing on a new market, even though it’s not possible to see the wide scale utilization needed to circumvent greenhouse effects. This is true for every other suggested alternative fuel. These fools are nothing more than diet pill salesman.

    Right-wingers who spew nonsensical terms like “Clean Coal” and “Drill Baby Drill” are concealing the fact that the upper limits of fossil resource consumption have been reached, so the need to lick the icing bowl is apparent. These fools only care about maintaining their wealth, and will wage war for a ration of what energy sources are left.

    Lefty’s think these issues are solvable with fancy light bulbs, corn, and solar panels. They’d love to sell you on these ideas because they might just have a stake in the company willing to produce such things. It’s stupidity that amounts to a drop in a bucket. Going Green is like pissing in the wind.

  3. Molly Gearhart said

    The only constant is change. You can count on that! It would be interesting to know what exactly is going on with global warming (if anything), but there are other ecological problems that we can do something about. Like recycling… not because of the climate change, but because there is a huge trash pile of grocery bags in the middle of the ocean, amongst other man-made atrocities.

    It’s a good thing to think about what we are doing to the earth. Maybe the ‘green movement’ is going a little overboard, but in the end, it’s actually helping. Helping people come together. Giving people a cause. Something to feel good about.

    In the end, we are all connected, and we are all connected to mother earth.

  4. Alyssa Fryberger said

    I do not think that the evidence for Global Warming is truly scientific. There are many environmental problems in the world but the Global Warming issue is a case of an idea that a few people found some evidence for and were successful in getting a spokes person that would attract media coverage. The issue was then blown out of proportion and an idea that has not been proven by science was accepted by many people because it was over publicized. Media is a useful tool but it has also been used many times to distort issues causing people to believe in thing that are not the truth. This is why all people should research the things they hear from the media for themselves and not just believe what it tells them.

  5. Brittny Balderston said

    I feel that some short term changes to help improve the environment is the base for long term changes. If people take the time once a week to recycle, that’s about 52 pieces of garbage that isn’t in a landfill. My point is that not everyone may be so concerned about the environment right now, but somehow we’re still finding ways to make it some kind of priority.

    For an example, my home has switched to a filter on our sink instead of buying bottled water every week. each would cost the same in the long run, except we don’t have all the trash leftover. This one change has not only reduced a “carbon footprint,” but also saves us money. Money is nice to have when we’re really broke, so we’re (in essence) “killing two birds with one stone.”

  6. Jorge said

    So why do some people think that the evidence for Global Warming isn’t truly scientific? Is it because many people’s desire to kill the messenger overshadows their ability to conduct scientific inquiry for themselves? The answer is yes. The substance of a topic like climate change is very often substituted for the contentiousness of opposing worldviews. If you’re a Conservative, you’ve likely been programmed to be wary of any issue labeled with the “Liberal Agenda” tag. If you’re a Liberal, you’ve likely been programmed to be suspicious of ideological views wreaking of a right-wing evangelical manifesto.

    Very often, sheeple herded to either side of the debate aren’t honest enough to admit they haven’t done research to consider issues with scientific underpinnings. They read the opinions of their political cohort, who boast a level of scientific authority due to some credential or title they hold. At a minimum, if individuals were willing to examine just the evidence submitted for rigorous peer review pertaining to greenhouse gas processes, they’d have to cede the merit of prevailing climate change theory. In other words, the evidence has reshaped initial hypotheses (opinions and guesses), and it lead to interpolations of collected data, thus forming a comprehensive theory that is dictated by evidence alone — not opinions.

    Now that the theory is firmly grounded in evidence, extrapolations are being made by researchers to try and anticipate long term effects of gasses in the atmosphere which effect the biosphere and hydrosphere. Extrapolations are subject to higher levels of uncertainty because of unknown factors. This is where much of the controversy about warming trends in the environment starts. If some of the extrapolations being made are true, then the effects for human beings are very significant. Changes to the way individuals live, and more importantly, the way economies run, would have to happen. There’s much more observation and evidence gathering that needs to take place.

    Political interests intentionally obfuscate this issue for obvious reasons, but it’s up to the individual to pick up their geography, geology and other science textbooks to learn and sort these issues for themselves. If you doubt what you read in those damn Liberal textbooks, then devise an experiment for yourself and test your hypothesis. Poof! You’re a scientist. You don’t need any authority to be a good scientist. In fact, authority is the worst thing you could have.

    However, if you’re so pathetic that you believe science is like a flavor of Gatorade, that there is such a thing as hard science and soft science, that you can just form an opinion about Global Warming/Climate Change based on what your parents and friends think, then you’re an idiot. Also, if you believe trendy behaviors of recycling, taking shorter showers, and driving hybrid electric vehicles will save the Earth, you’re missing a very important point about how human populations impact the environment.

  7. Alan Wergedal said

    Global warming is an issue but how to make it publicly thought about or an issue involving the majority of the people on the planets, that still is an issue. This is a normal problem do people still think it doesn’t have anything to do with them? Or is it an issue of i don’t care it wont affect my life time! Short sighted, lack of proper research publications with good proof, ignorance of the general public? It is an issue but there is no PR firm making it a major issue people in this country don’t have jobs why would they worry about the ice cap melting. It will be an issue and be talked about as a side bar for a long time unless someone can step up and make the realities of the situation more clear to the general people of the world we aren’t all scientists tell it to us like we are all ignorant of the issue that maybe the only way the general public will get involved just dont make a remix of a Michael Jackson song to do it.

  8. Dustin Booth said

    Climate change/global warming (whichever semantic wrapper you prefer) is obviously a contentious issue, and it is very interesting to watch this issue’s media popularity wax and wane. I have to say I agree with most of what Ronnie has posted above, and I’m curious to see if he has any suggestions as to whether or not we have the ability to do something about it, or just wait until we absorb all of our available resources and wither away and die (or build some spaceships and get out of Dodge).

    According to current scientific data and it’s interpretation, it is obvious that the meteorological processes, as with all geological processes on our planet are cyclical and constantly changing. According to what astronomers and geologists currently believe, the Earth has been through about every type of climate imaginable, from fire to ice. We as humans have only occupied a very, very minute slice of time spent on this rock, and are experiencing the beginning of one of these cyclical, periodic shifts. As to whether or not humans are contributing either positively or negatively to this phenomenon is fairly impossible to actually quantify.

    I guess I would personally prefer to be excited about fancy light bulbs and corn, even if the bottom line is that these new technologies are being implemented to make a buck. Even if it is an ultimately futile gesture, at least humans can be proud of the fact that we figured out how out of balance our resource consumption has become, and made some cursory attempts at trying to rectify the situation.

  9. Ronnie McDonald said

    If people are stupid enough to think that human-induced climate effects aren’t taking place, they’re too dumb to read a 100-level geography text; they’ve never seen clouds of smog over large cities; they’ve never felt the uncharacteristic warmth remaining after dark in a desert city; they’ve never smelt the air in a town with a steel mill; they certainly won’t produce children with asthma and inexplicable birth defects. Instead, they’ll pride themselves on having large families; guilt themselves into feeding starving children of the 3rd world until reaching the point, where for every child born, another will surely die.

    The issue really isn’t about innovating our way out of an “unknowable” crisis. It isn’t about whether we can recycle and conserve our way out of trouble. It’s about narcissism, entitlement and the infinite – growth paradigm.

    I’ve heard it said that there is nothing, anywhere, in any combination, that can replace the edifice built by fossil fuels. Fossil energy is finite. Thermodynamic law tells us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It can only be converted from usable to unusable. If I am to agree that oil consumption is solely responsible for producing the expansion and wealth of modern societies, then I must accept that when the oil goes – so go empty promises of economic stability.

    The American dream evaporates; I awaken to the harsh realization that if Earth’s resources are finite, the government’s promise that all-the-world can attain the extravagance that I personally enjoy is nonsense. Prosperity is inexorably linked to disparity; the gap between the have-and-have-nots grows concurrently.

    A knee jerk response to this idea is, “well, what about alternative fuels, what about recycling, and what about the colonization of Mars?”

    I had to think about these issues critically and responsibly, so what did I do? I turned to the bright lights of Hollywood: About a year ago, I watched Matt Damon get on TV to ask everyone in the developed world to turn off all the lights in the house, for, like an hour or something; a grand symbolic gesture to signify that folks care about energy conservation. Damon was simultaneously endorsing eco-friendly light bulbs, clean water for thirsty Africans — and general silliness to boot. Before that, I tuned to Larry King Live one night and watched Sheryl Crow jest that a limit be placed on how much toilet paper people should be allowed to use in a single sitting. She thought a single square would do the trick. Though it was only a joke, I thought it exemplified well the empty gesture of conservation. If you’ve ever had to wipe a baby’s bottom, you’d probably sell your soul for a can of wipes if you saw there was only one left.

    The reality is that when considering alternatives to resource consumption, you have to honestly consider how much energy it takes to produce the alternative. How many people think of the hundreds upon thousands of acres of arable land needed to produce corn ethanol? Can a meaningful percentage of gasoline fuel be supplemented by corn or bio-diesel derived from cooking oil? By the way, electricity is not an energy source; it’s a bi-product that takes tremendous amounts of energy to produce. How many millions of acres for windmill and solar panel farms are needed to power a city and distant suburbs? How much burning of fossil energy is necessary to gather, cultivate, harvest, and refine such things?

    What good is technology if it doesn’t produce an adequate return of investment? When the automobile was first developed, the masters of the universe lobbied the government hard to defund and dismantle all forms of public transportation. They needed to create a market for cars. The railroad system in the U.S is nothing more than a pack mule for consumer goods, but there are millions of miles of roads. People now make daily commutes from suburbs to cities ranging from 20-150 miles round trip, and the most popular vehicles are capable of only 15 – 35 mpg on average. The hydrogen fuel infrastructure (hydrogen gas stations) needed to circumvent gasoline consumption doesn’t exist. The amount of electricity needed to power hybrids doesn’t answer the necessity to use petroleum to make tires, resins, paint, fiberglass, ad infinitum.

    Do you honestly think it’s responsible and ethical to build another 800-million automobiles? Try explaining this to China, India and elsewhere. World economies only seek to stimulate demand. This is done by inventing new technology, but believing technology will allow mere mortals to thwart natural law and increase quality of life is both true and misleading. Limited resources collide with unlimited demands no matter how you spin it.

    But hey, if the air gets too thick and the fresh water dries up, we can always hop a spaceship to Mars. Well, a few of our kids, anyway.

  10. Aj Ayala said

    I was never really a big believer of global warming. First every argument that the environmentalists could come up with could be dis proven by past events. I world transfers through cycles, hot and cold. This is nothing new, well it maybe to us since most these cycles haven’t happened for hundreds of years, but the earth still goes through them. So the fact that global warming had it’s efforts have fallen off the front page really does affect me, or my fears about the world coming to an end. I can finally find out what my actors and actresses have been up too.

  11. Jordan Gregory said

    even though the recession is taking priority over most issues, i think its important that we dont forget about every other subject plaguing not only America, but the world. Whether climategate proves to be true or not, i dont think we can say that global warming isn’t occuring. Just because America is experiancing a cold winter doesnt mean the ice caps aren’t melting

  12. Tyler Shomaker said

    Today the recession is a huge issue and the push for green cars is still prominent. However, the only reason why the hybrid has been wildly successful is because it allows immediate relief to its buyer. The consumer believes since the car gets better gas mileage its better for the environment. That is not always the case. Most hybrid cars use a nickel cadmium battery which is one of the most potent battery known. So in the long run it could do more damage to the environment. What this boils down to is America has always been a “fix at what is at hand and we will worry about the rest later” society. So I do believe that the green movement does need a spokesperson to re-energize this movement so that we are able to prepare for the future when it comes.

  13. Marcus Hill MCCNM 101 said

    The only reason I don’t believe global warming is happening is because how small of an issue it is in the news. Yeah it’s mentioned but if it were truly threating life on Earth, I would think that it would be on the internet, advertisements, and more discussed in school. The recession is a big problem but if there’s no life on Earth, no one is going to be around to care about a recession.

    I also don’t feel like global warming is happening because of like the blog said, lack of crucial evidence. Icebergs are supposed to be melting the ocean is supposed to be rising and much more phenomenon.

    It will probably occur over time depending on how we treat our environment and how much technology advances and several other factors.

  14. Angelica Harvey said

    I am not really sure about the issue of global warming. Indeed some winters might be colder than others but just because it hasn’t happened in a while doesn’t mean it is totally out of the ordinary. The earth goes through cycles, there are good years and they are bad, but it pretty much left up in the air. No one can ever really know for certain the years in which there will be “good” or “bad” weather. Even so, I dont believe that the issue of global warming should be ignored either. We as a population are very wasteful and do not consider the consequences of our actions. Just because the results won’t occur for years down the line doesnt mean consideration on how to take care of or minimize it should be ignored. When problems are ignored they only get worse. People seem to think that all we have is time and only focus on what is in front of them, but that is a very selfish way to look at things. What about future generations? Should they have to suffer for our carelessness? I’m not saying that global warming is happening and I’m not saying it isn’t, but if it is a potential problem of the future effort should be made sooner rather than later to slow down its effects.

  15. Chelsi Jackson said

    Recession is the main topic that you hear about these days. Global warming has taken a back seat to the worlds economic and social problems. The articles that talk about global warming aren’t in public access a lot of them are in magazines. If the Global problems we are facing are so bad then they should be placed somewhere where people can read them for instance the newspaper and bill boards. Global warming should be taken more seriously, if activists were smart they would warn people about the situation. They should take lessons from the company that warn people about the hazards of meth because they find ways to catch your attention let you know the ugly truth about drugs. Global Warming should be taken seriously and would be with better catchier ways of grabbing your attention.

  16. Alex Miller said

    I think that global waming is a very serious problem. People look past the fact that the earth is continuously being used by its inhabitants. Humans are the most destructive organisms in the world and we are slowly destroying our own habitat. I think that the media should focus more on global warming advertisements that let the audiences know about what is happening to the planet. The earth isn’t going to last very long if humans don’t take care of it. Future generations will be severely effected by the damage we have done to the environment. Future generations will be the ones cleaning up our industrial messes. Global warming effects every organism in the world and should be taken very seriously.

  17. Jacob Chavez said

    Honestly Global Warming is an issue but not that big of an issue at the same time. If Global Warming is going to happen then its going to happen no matter what we do we cant stop it. I really dont care about it to much because its probably not going to happen in my life time. I live day by day not to much in the future. We should keep the going green happening and there should be positive stories about keeping the world green but only sometimes it shouldnt be the headline of every day paper or news. And when and IF Global Warming happens in my life time then it should be The headline but intill then just keep in in the back of the mind. “Thats all I gots to say about that”- Forest Gump

  18. Amanda Norris MCCM 101 said

    Although it is not covering the front pages at the moment global warming is still an issue. Right now though, it has taken a backseat to other more impending issues like the troubling economy. However, even if it’s not making headlines anymore it is still an issue that needs to be addressed. The way I see it is that even if global warming is exagerated or it’s just a part of the Earth’s natural cycle is there really any downside to recyling? To finding more alternate fuel sources? What’s the risk to making our planet a nicer place to live? It’s not exactly a gamble to go green and I think that’s somthing we all need to remember.

  19. McKenzie said

    I think this is a clear example of how ignorant man-kind or even more specifically, Americans are. Our country as a whole is so self-centered and greedy that all that matters today is how much money you make, or what the latest celebrity scandal is. Few people have real concern or care for the environment. What we really need to ask ourselves is, what are you going to do with all of your money once we are trying to survive an ice age. Thats an exaggerated example, but its not an impossible scenario.
    I think that it is much more newsworthy than a lot of stuff that makes the news. News networks need to get back to addressing serious issued plaguing our earth. For example, cover the royal wedding a little less and talk about the environment. I think that a big part of this issuse is awareness. Politicians and government need to take the front seat and really address our environmental issues instead of just mentioning them.

  20. Jareth Thomas said

    I believe in global warming. Most people usually don’t care about it enough to say yes or no to the idea of it but everyone has heard of it. It’s true that the long term goals of the people usually come second to the short term ones. But if we can’t work towards some sort of long term plan, how will we ever know what we are truly headed for. We should at least have an idea of what to do if global warming is real.
    The fact that we have had multiple ice ages in the known history of our planet shows that there can be extreme climate changes in different areas of the world. It’s not to believe that us pumping gases and fumes into the atmosphere will one day cause the world to heat up noticeably. The average person doesn’t even know what is in the atmosphere or that there are a different parts of it. The fact global warming is a well known thing even if not fully believed shows that it has actually been thought about by a lot of people. The fact that some scientist hid evidence should not throw the entire theory out of everyone’s mind. If it could’ve made sense, why should some bad decisions cause such a harsh disbelief of it? It should make us want to find the truth out even more. Is there or is there not global warming and if there is, what can we do about it?

  21. Shilay Willis said

    Global warming is an issue, but it seems like everytime it is brought up they are coming up with the same facts everytime. Yes we know its hotter than it should be. I don’t want to see another commercial about a sad polar bear. Instead what those who are pushing this issue need to do is talk about how it will directly benefit a person to “go green” or how it will hurt them if it doesn’t. That’s how selfish people are these days. If it doesn’t affect them then it doesn’t matter. Even to say that it will hurt a person’s great great great grandchild, doesnt really affect a person too much

  22. This is one of the topics concerned with the paper our class will turn in. The assignment was issued for us to realize how much time mass media takes up in our everyday lives, and also to show us that there is more to life than just media. If we could get the entire world for just one day as our assignment requests, to cut off from the media, a major issue such as problems with global warming could be thoroughly addressed. People would actually have to talk to one another and think of events that have gone on in the news and events that are affecting their everyday lives and future. There would be no talk of the episode of Jersey Shore or South Park coming on that night, which will open up the door for more serious issues going on in our world to be discusses. But a worldwide unplug from media would be impossible without mass forms of anarchy so it’s probably better that we don’t condone such measures.

  23. Karlee Weiler said

    I agree, the people would much rather hear a story about Derek Jeter hitting the 3,000 club or who Leonardo DiCaprio is dating. But have people stopped to listen to what is going on with our home, Earth? Maybe if we paid more attention to what Leonardo DiCaprio was trying to preach, rather then who he is making out with, some of us would be more educated on how detremental it is to learning about the changes going on in our ecosystems. DiCaprio is an environmental activist and is really trying to get his fans to understand the importance of taking care of our Earth. Our people have the mindset, of out of sight, out of mind. In reality, climate change really isnt that far out of sight. It is slowly showing its colors to the world, and we are definetly starting to feel it. If we dont concentrate on this now, it will be too late, for all of us.
    Karlee Weiler

  24. Katy Carpio said

    People arguing about climate change, including whether or not we should even care, should keep in mind that global warming alters more than just the daily high temperatures. By subtly altering oceanic currents, other, less obvious results can occur. These include, in general, much more severe weather; severe weather includes the winter of 2010-2011, in which the U.S. and Europe endured freakishly cold temperatures. Other difficulties include jellyfish blooms in the Sea of Japan and the Mediterranean Sea, which have the potential to totally collapse biodiversity. At the same time that these catastrophes loom, people debate whether they should even pay attention to the debate. The reality is that it doesn’t really matter; global warming and cooling cycles are driven by forces far more powerful than we could hope to change, even with concerted effort, in my lifetime. So I say, accept the truth of climate change, then use your smartphone to enjoy some Angry Birds or something. It won’t matter if you follow the news or not.

  25. Dom Harris said

    I also agree I believe people care more about our immediate future or of news that has prevalence to the future. Just because people might be tired of hearing about our global warming problem and of those of our Earth doesn’t mean we should stop talking about it. Obviously there are problems that need immediate attentions such as those of the recent debt ceiling but to totally forget about our earth’s future and our children future would be negligent on out parts because what if it does happen. Who will have all the answers then?

  26. Erica Walsh said

    Global Warming is a major issue, we see all the time about what we can do to prevent it from happening. Subjects like these aren’t brought up until someone with power brings it to light. Global warming has been around for millions even billions of years and yet people are now being more concerned about it. Someone as powerful say like Al Gore made a documentary on it. ‘The Inconvenient Truth’ made a controversial splash now we see people making organizations and pouring millions of dollars on projects to prevent global warming. Many companies are now making products that are energy friendly and trying to find new ways so that society can be much more aware of how much damage we do cause. Especially with being over populated, running out of fresh water, fresh crops, ect we take and take from earths natural resources and run it dry. We as man kind won’t have a future if we don’t pay attention to what is going on around us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: