NEED IN 8 HOURS or LESS

Political party sides often seem sincere in their convictions and conclusions for the reality of climate change but catastrophic consequences may loom in our generation. What should drive environmental solutions, political parties or the science that focuses on the reality of the problem?

ANSWER THE ABOVE QUESTION AND THEN REPLY TO MY CLASSMATE’S RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTION AND EXPLAIN WHY YOU AGREE? (A MINIMUM OF 125 WORDS or MORE)

 CLASSMATE’S POST

Political parties on both sides of the aisle can drive an agenda no matter what the topic. Climate change is no different. One side question how much of climate change is man-made and seeks to poke holes in the science of it. The other side pushes the science that shows the effects of man-made global warming all while flying private jets to and from the conferences, vacations, and rallies that emit the same greenhouse gases that they rail against. Neither party has a monopoly on the causes of climate change or the solutions to fix it but, rather, the answers probably lie somewhere in the middle. Environmental solutions should be driven by the science of the issue with caution given to how the causal effects are obtained. Those too can be tainted by politics and agendas. Stripping the politics away from climate change is nearly impossible but a valiant effort must be given in order to find common-ground solutions. Otherwise, discussion devolves into name-calling and finger-pointing and each side gets more entrenched in their long-held beliefs.