The "Central Debate" Over Global Warming Today

The Intersection
By Chris Mooney
Jan 30, 2006 10:40 PMNov 5, 2019 10:11 AM


Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

Juliet Eilperin, too, had a front page story in the Post yesterday about global warming. Alas, it wasn't as juicy as the Times piece about James Hansen (though it included a bit about him). It was mainly about the future risk of dangerous or abrupt climate change, but I found myself puzzled by the story framing introduced in the very first paragraph:

Now that most scientists agree human activity is causing Earth to warm, the central debate has shifted to whether climate change is progressing so rapidly that, within decades, humans may be helpless to slow or reverse the trend.

Isn't Eilperin missing a step? I agree that the debate about what's happening in the atmosphere is basically over. But doesn't that mean that the next debate will be over how and to what extent global warming impacts--sea level rise, melting glaciers, etc--will be felt locally, and to what extent local changes are indicative of a global trend?

It's not that the question of when global warming will reach its "tipping point" is uninteresting--in fact, it's absolutely crucial, especially from a policy/decision standpoint. But in her framing, Eilperin ignores the growing story about present day and near-future impacts, which is where a lot of debate can be expected to occur over the coming years. In fact, that debate has already begun.

1 free article left
Want More? Get unlimited access for as low as $1.99/month

Already a subscriber?

Register or Log In

1 free articleSubscribe
Discover Magazine Logo
Want more?

Keep reading for as low as $1.99!


Already a subscriber?

Register or Log In

More From Discover
Recommendations From Our Store
Shop Now
Stay Curious
Our List

Sign up for our weekly science updates.

To The Magazine

Save up to 40% off the cover price when you subscribe to Discover magazine.

Copyright © 2024 Kalmbach Media Co.