Perceptions of Global Warming

After reading the articles written in Global Issues in Context (see endnotes to reference the articles), it can be identified two different (not opposite neither the unique) postures for the issue that can be considered on e of the most debated in recent years: Global Warming.

The most defended idea, and one that is often taken because of the scientific proof it is offered, is that of course the global warming is happening in an unprecedentedly accelerated rythm: the climate measures can prove it and the effects can be seen all around the world. A parallel posture state that this acceleration is a direct effect of human activity, specially of the release of greenhouse gases and the damage in the ecosystems, which difficult the stabilization of the environment.

But, in the article by Sophie N. it is established a different and also parallel posture of this problem: it is recognized that there cannot be denied the facts: rising temperature, changes in water and air flows, the ozone whole and so on. In addition, its main demand is that the situation is "overexploited" by politic-economical interests. This article recognizes the nature of the earth to change in regular periods, as the geological investigations have proved, but also emphasizes that it has create a global concern, with new objectives and of course new strategies. The important aspect came when this strategies have the "excuse" in the global warming and respond to other interests: it has been criticized the announced concern of superpowers with the almost null commitment they have in reducing greenhouse gases emissions. The example cited is the case of USA and China, which are highly polluting countries which are in a struggle for a reduction in the industrial activities of the opposite. This demands, state the article, seems to have an economic interest under the water in the crucial struggle for being the most powerful country: USA trying to keep this status that nowadays belongs to it, and China to continue with the exponential growing it has displayed in the last decades. Both need for this purposes the less possible restrictions in the economic activities, and the reduction of greenhouse gases (considering also the protection of soil from deforestation and the control of urban growing) are drawbacks in these purposes.

My opinion is that we cannot ignore the facts, and what we can do is respond to them looking for the most adequate solution in both short and long term scenarios. I consider that the struggle for a dominant nation is something that, historically, has almost no possibilities to stop, and by looking this aim as a priority, is hard that a country have a serious commitment with the environment. But i also think that the use of a global situation as an excuse is an out-of-context strategy that deserves the non-approval of the society: and is the denying of the posture of the country what must be supported, not the denying of the global warming, because as it was stated previously, is a situation with almost clear causes but with defined effects, and it must be treated as this: a global situation that requires a global plan of action that respond to the benefit of everyone, and not private interests.

to see the complete articles:
http://0-find.galegroup.com.millenium.itesm.mx/gic/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC-Documents&idigest=31e2643791dbd622bf913b88105ef6e0&type=retrieve&tabID=T004&prodId=GIC&docId=CJ248531394&source=gale&userGroupName=itesmgic&version=1.0

http://0-find.galegroup.com.millenium.itesm.mx/gic/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC-Documents&idigest=31e2643791dbd622bf913b88105ef6e0&type=retrieve&tabID=T003&prodId=GIC&docId=A245114996&source=gale&userGroupName=itesmgic&version=1.0