Are American’s Right to be Skeptical of ‘the Science?’

It’s a well-known fact that many Americans are sceptical of the science behind Climate Change. Journalist Jason Richwine argues that it is logical to be sceptical of the science behind climate change. In an article for the National Review, Richwine writes “Americans are wise to be skeptical of claims that ‘Science’ backs this or that fashionable cause.”

 Richwine is writing about politicized issues and the fact that politicized issues tend to have skewed data that supports one side or another. One of the politicized issues he cites is the issue of climate change. He says, “if elites in government and academia want Americans to be less skeptical about the science, it would help for them to stop inserting politics under its banner.”

While he is right to say climate change is a politicized issue, that does not mean Americans should be skeptical of the science behind it. There are many studies done on an international level by institutions who have nothing to do with US politics that prove climate change is real. The most recent study done by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has shown that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” This comes from a group that has no interest in US politics, so there is no need to believe that the findings of the study were put out to support the position of the Republicans or the Democrats on global warming. Just because an issue is politicized doesn’t mean that it is impossible to find unbiased information on the issue.

Climate Change is real, and Americans should believe “the science” behind it regardless of whether or not the issue is politicized here in the US.

Images retrieved from:

https://www.google.com/search?q=climate+change+science&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimnOek6_jLAhWGPiYKHV-gBCcQ_AUICSgD&biw=1600&bih=755#imgrc=iYWCZp_NfW_oQM%3A

https://www.google.com/search?q=neither+democrat+nor+republican&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDhJn57fjLAhUGQyYKHcYnBEIQ_AUICCgC&biw=1600&bih=755#imgrc=46nKuNB3fACEZM%3A

Was President Obama Wrong to Veto the Keystone XL Pipeline?

In March of 2015 President Obama vetoed the Keystone XL Pipeline Approval Act. This put an end to the giant pipe meant to pump oil from the tar sands of Canada down to the Gulf of Mexico. Some, including me, saw this as a victory for the environment. However, many still argue that the President was wrong to veto the approval of the pipeline and that the pipeline would bring more good than it would harm.

There is no doubt that the pipeline would have brought economic gain for some. According to The New York Times, supporters of the pipeline claim that “the pipeline would be a job creator.” This is true but all of the jobs created would be temporary, lasting about two years or less. The same New York Times article goes on to say that the pipeline would only create a measly 35 permanent jobs.

Another argument made by supporters of the pipeline is that the pipeline would be the safest mode to transport the oil. They say that as shipping of oil by train has increased, the amount of rail car explosions has also increased. This fact may be true, but that does not mean that oil pipelines are safe. When looking at a similar pipeline, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, it is easy to see just how dangerous these pipelines can be. According to the pipelines website, 32 people were killed during the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline and 10 workers have been killed there since. The Keystone XL pipeline would most likely have been just as dangerous.

The arguments made by those in favor of the Keystone XL pipeline are easily refutable, and I believe that President Obama was correct to veto the pipeline.

(Image retrieved from: http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/2014/01/31/131keystonepipeline.jpg)