us that human action is causing a warming of the earth. Scientists who have this view recognize, nonetheless, that there is uncertainty as to the specific outcome of the warming. Society often chooses to focus on the word “uncertainty” in articles and media campaigns believing that as long as we are irresolute regarding the dangers of global warming we do not have to change our way of life. What Adam believes to be the problem is that many members of the U.S. Congress buy into these claims. The degree to which the greenhouse skeptics and their organizations have “succeeded in blurring the facts about global warming” is evident when we listen to many congressmen talk about the issue, Adam explained. I was amazed at this educated response from my interviewee. The fervor and immense amount of knowledge on the topic that Adam displayed was amazing to me. It scared Adam, as it did me, that even politicians so readily discount scientific evidence.Adam went on to say that “the carbon dioxide we emit today will probably affect the climate well into our children’s future and likely into the future of our grandchildren.” Despite the widespread recognition of this fact, worldwide emissions of fossil fuels continue to increase every year. Emissions will increase even further as the developing world moves towards greater industrialization. At the conclusion of our interview I began to understand and share with Adam the feeling of anger he exhibited towards skeptics of global warming that had at first puzzled me. It seems as if extensive efforts are being made to discredit scientific evidence not because proponents of the theory actually believe there is no correlation between the rise in temperature and carbon dioxide but rather because society is afraid they may be forced to sacrifice their standard of living. ...
