Max Gerber] I am often asked whether I agree with the new group selectionists, and the questioners are always surprised when I say I do not. After all, group selection sounds like a reasonable extension of evolutionary theory and a plausible explanation of the social nature of humans. Also, the group selectionists tend to declare victory, and write as if their theory has already superseded a narrow, reductionist dogma that selection acts only at the level of genes. The more carefully you think about group selection, the less sense it makes, and the more poorly it fits the facts of human psychology and history.
But the scientific theories presented here are old and long discredited. And no attempt is made to explain why each speaker seems to contradict the next. In truth, several members of the mostly elderly audience seem to doze off while the temperature graphs are projected.
They come to life only when the rock stars of the movement take the stage—not the C-team scientists but the A-team ideological warriors like Morano and Horner. This is the true purpose of the gathering: And the strategy appears to be working. Obama at the Copenhagen summit: Abrupt shifts, when they come, are usually precipitated by dramatic events.
Which is why pollsters are so surprised by what has happened to perceptions about climate change over a span of just four years. A Harris poll found that 71 percent of Americans believed that the continued burning of fossil fuels would cause the climate to change. By the figure had dropped to 51 percent.
In June the number of Americans who agreed was down to 44 percent—well under half the population.
As recently as the year Newt Gingrich did a climate change TV spot with Nancy Pelosi the issue still had a veneer of bipartisan support in the United States.
Those days are decidedly over. Today, 70—75 percent of self-identified Democrats and liberals believe humans are changing the climate—a level that has remained stable or risen slightly over the past decade. In sharp contrast, Republicans, particularly Tea Party members, have overwhelmingly chosen to reject the scientific consensus.
In some regions, only about 20 percent of self-identified Republicans accept the science. Equally significant has been a shift in emotional intensity.
Climate change used to be something most everyone said they cared about—just not all that much. When Americans were asked to rank their political concerns in order of priority, climate change would reliably come in last. For these right-wingers, opposition to climate change has become as central to their worldview as low taxes, gun ownership and opposition to abortion.
Many climate scientists report receiving death threats, as do authors of articles on subjects as seemingly innocuous as energy conservation. The effects of this emotional intensity have been on full display in the race to lead the Republican Party.
But the effects of the right-wing climate conspiracies reach far beyond the Republican Party. The Democrats have mostly gone mute on the subject, not wanting to alienate independents.
And the media and culture industries have followed suit. Five years ago, celebrities were showing up at the Academy Awards in hybrids, Vanity Fair launched an annual green issue and, inthe three major US networks ran stories on climate change.
This uneasy silence has persisted through the end of the hottest decade in recorded history and yet another summer of freak natural disasters and record-breaking heat worldwide.JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.
is and in to a was not you i of it the be he his but for are this that by on at they with which she or from had we will have an what been one if would who has her. Environmental Impacts Of Large Dams Environmental Sciences Essay by admin on August 10, July 13, About big dikes have been built as a response to run into energy or H2O need.
The Environmental Impacts of Large Dams Land and water are ecologically linked in a natural system called a watershed. From the smallestdroplet to the mightiest river, water works to shape the land, taking with it sediment and dissolved materialsthat drain to watercourses and, in .
Published: Mon, 5 Dec Sustainability is the prevention or reduction of the effect of environmental issues for humans to live a sustainable life and as part of the effort is to return human use of natural resources to a sustainable limit at which it can be replenished.
Professor Omar M. Yaghi University of Berkeley (United States) Omar M. Yaghi is the James and Neeltje Tretter Chair Professor of Chemistry at the University of California, Berkeley, and a Senior Faculty Scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.