Climate Change Debates

Written - April 5, 2007


Criticism is what makes science strong. When a group of scientists publish a new idea their peers carefully weigh in to critique methods, data and conclusions. The scrutiny that an idea must undergo to be accepted within the scientific community is possibly the most meticulous thought process humans have developed. There is, however, a flaw in the process – people will often report scientific ideas that support their ideals without looking for scientific criticism.

In Africa, a series of malaria epidemics began in 1988 in an area that had not experienced frequent epidemics before: the East African highlands. The IPCC stated in 1998 that climate change in Africa could increase the range of mosquitoes and therefore lead to increased epidemics. In any highland area climate changes are more easily observed; higher elevations are naturally cooler, therefore changes in temperature related to a species habitat are more dramatic.

However, a group of scientists published in 2001 that there had not been any statistically significant changes in climate in the East African highlands area. They concluded that other human factors like drug resistance, increased travel or crumbling health infrastructures were more likely causes of malarial increases. The idea that there was no observable climate change in East Africa was published far and wide.

There was immediate criticism of the 2001 findings. The statistical method used was questioned, as well as the data set, which only included observations until 1995. The highlands region in East Africa has a highly variable climate, therefore more study was required.

In 2006, a group of scientists revisited the 2001 study using a different statistical method and weather observations up to 2002 rather than 1995. They found that indeed there was a significant warming trend in East Africa responsible for increasing the range and numbers of mosquitoes in the highlands. Rather than ignoring the human factor involved in malaria spread, the authors suggested both humans and climate change contributed to the epidemics.

There is no doubt that there are deniers of climate change. However, studies such as this show that when held up to scrutiny using recent data, denials fall apart. There exists little debate in the scientific community that climate change is happening. Rather the debate exists in the media, where ideals are supported by old ideas.