The Impact of Creative Ads on Climate Change
Published on October 15, 2009 / News
Today is Blog Action Day, an annual event uniting bloggers throughout the world in posting about the same issue on the same day. The issue of this year’s event is Climate Change.
I recently came across a creative ad campaign produced by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). Their ads depict likable animals, in disastrous conditions caused by human activity, and push a clear message: help stop global warming. But is it safe to assume that simply acting on this message will save the planet from a global climate crises, or do these ads erroneously target human activity as the root cause of climate change?
Let’s take a look at what the experts say. I chose to research scientists not working for NASA to get a non-government perspective of the issue. I was led to the Global Warming Petition Project, signed by 31,478 American scientists, including 9,029 with PhDs. Each signer is equipped with the essential training to comprehend and measure the scientific data relevant to human activity upon the environment. Their petition states:
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
So if human activity is not responsible for global warming or climate change, what is? Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, believes the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun. Could it be that the star accounting for 99.86% of the Solar System’s mass is responsible for global warming? Or are our tail pipes really heating the climate on a planetary scale?
Getting back to the WWF’s creative ads, I agree with the message of preservation, conservation, and pollution reduction. However, what may spawn as a harmless thought in the mind of an animal lover, to improve upon one’s treatment of the environment, may grow into a stronger support for a dangerous global change – a change in the form of a new government energy policy based not on scientific truth, but on a human-caused global warming hypothesis that tens of thousands of national scientists openly reject.
Blog Action Day 2009 is seeking solutions to climate change so here are mine. First, get the facts straight. Do your own research and view the climate debate posts at MasterResource, a free-market energy blog. Find ways to conserve energy on an individual level for the sake of self-sufficiency. For example, one may produce a portion of one’s own food to reduce chemical consumption and lessen taxes and pollution culminating from farming, manufacturing, and transporting foods before they are sold by markets.
This isn’t an attempt to discredit the creative people at the WWF. They’ve done a great job at solving a problem visually and effectively present a clear message. Although if the data used to backup their message is false, the ads use imaginary scenarios to mislead us, conceal the true cause of climate change, and promote bigger actions to be taken on a notional issue. Perhaps it would be more accurate for the WWF to “help stop global warming” by creating an ad with a polar bear chillin’ next to a gigantic mirror that’s pointed at the sun to reflect heat back into space.
Subscribe to get the latest posts via RSS or follow me on Twitter.
Email Post / Print Post / Leave a Reply
4 Responses to “The Impact of Creative Ads on Climate Change”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
-
[...] MatthewPaul (The Impact of Creative Ads on Climate Change) [...]
-
[...] The Impact of Creative Ads on Climate Change [...]
You can also take five minutes and discuss global warming with anyone who teaches Geology on a Collegiate level; a field of study that is becoming very unpopular because of their unanimous findings on heating and cooling cycles of the planet, that shockingly disprove any theory that humans contribute to the temperature of the planet.
Like you, I don’t think being poor stewards of our planet is acceptable, but again, lets base it on facts not hysteria. So many terrible decisions have been enacted on a Government level as reactions to worry or tragedy.
Jorell,
I agree. It’s unfortunate that the extensive observational and experimental studies, which many credible scientists believe disproves the claims of “global warming” advocates, have been ignored and refused debate. Thanks for commenting.