CNN's most recent photo attachment “conspicuous images that show the destruction of the environment aim to inspire actions”, claims that photographs of pile of garbage, broken down houses and dust storms “show the devastating effects of climate change”. This is wrong. The pictures have nothing to do with climate change. They show induced environmental deterioration, poor land use decisions and collabedin -related infrastructure in connection with poverty, the air -conditioned phenomena are not. There is indications that CNN again replaces emotional images for science to promote the narrative that climate change causes everything bad.
The short report of CNN discusses a visual presentation that is administered on the Global Climate Alliance (GCA) here, currently Summit, with the conference at the UN World Environment Day from June June 7th. Apart from pictures that have nothing to do with climate change, other pictures describe the consequences of extreme weather events, of which the species were common in the course of history. Data show that such weather patterns have not become more or more serious. In short, the series of pictures shows the human tragedy, not the effects of the supposedly dangerous anthropogenic climate change.
Let's start with the obvious: a photo of children who collect garbage from Myanmar Inle Lake is not a history of climate change – it is a history of waste management. Plastic piles floating in a lake indicate social neglect, no change in atmospheric CO₂ concentrations. CNN tries to adopt this as proof of “climate law”. In reality, this is the result of a poor sanitary policy and an inadequate waste infrastructure. No science examined by experts leads to plastic accumulation in lakes on anthropogenic climate change.
The second picture CNN decided to highlight from the right side. A house currently shows in the Ganges River in West Bengalen, India, to erosion. Erosion is a well -understood hydrological process that has been redesigned by river banks for thousands of years. It is worsened by deforestation and not regulated buildings near Dynamic River Systems – not by global temperature anomalies. The real problem here is an irresponsible construction in flood areas. The construction of the banks of one of the most active sediment transport systems in the world is a risk that is completely independent of “carbon pollution”.
Other images show the shrinking aral sea, a decline caused by the Soviet era guidelines that bred water into the sea for irrigation, and garbage heaps in Myanmar are again problems that arise from public politics and human actions, which, however, do not have any effects of climate change.
The CNN article is typically obtained extensive claims without ensuring empirical support. We were told that the pictures reflect the “slow violence” of climate change – a phrase that is emotionally powerful but scientifically hollow. There is certainly a slow environmental deterioration, but it is dishonest to combine it with climate change. CNN wants the readers to feel something instead of thinking critically. This is emotional manipulation.
CNN also tries to legitimize this narrative by calling for the support of the United Nations human rights office (Ohchr), which describes climate change as a “human rights crisis”. This type of rhetorical supervision dilutes the credibility of both institutions. While the climate always had human consequences and turned it into a platform for political interest representation through photography and activism, which tariffs when journalism distorts public understanding. It frames all environmental problems, regardless of the origin, as symptoms of global warming. It is both scientifically imprecise and lazy.
Let's return to facts. According to the Intergovern Mental Panel on the sixth evaluation report of climate change (AR6), Chapter 12, some regions are likely to occur more intensively or drought, and the report becomes clear that the assignment of individual events or regional environmental devices on climate change remains deeply uncertain. The IPCC expressly warns of non -defined stories that transform every weather or any environmental tanomaly into a climate crisis. However, CNN fully ignores this caution.
Unfortunately, CNN has for an organization that claims to be a “news” insert Images as an argument. Regardless of whether it is polar bears on a floating ice or orange sky from forest fires, CNN has the habit of presenting visual anecdotes instead of the analytical context. As can be seen, forest fires, droughts and floods have occurred. If an outlet Cherry picks photos of destruction without evidence of some causes and effects through data are provided by data, they participate in a narrative building-not on scientific communication.
In addition, CNN never discusses adaptation or resilience in its history. If the problem were really climate change, would it not make more sense to concentrate on solutions such as infrastructure investments, urban areas and better resource management? Instead, they emphasize feelings of fate and helplessness. Emotional pressure, no declaration of consent, is your goal.
Compare this with data-controlled resources such as Klima at a glance that documents the actual trends with extreme weather and climate actrics. In contrast to what CNN could imply through images, the frequency of droughts from the United States has not increased in the long term. In fact, in the 20th century, some of the worst droughts, including the Dust Bowl, became significant before the modern CO₂ values became significant.
Similarly, floods and increase in sea levels in photo -oriented stories are routinely exaggerated. As for over a century, the sea level rose with a rate of about 3 mm per year. This is one foot per year-not exactly one Hollywood style catastrophe. Human decisions – as on the structure on eroding coasts or meadows – correspond to most visible damage.
In short, CNN's article and the exhibition that promotes it is nothing more than an elaborate photo surgery that is disguised as a climate adjustment. The images shown can cause sympathy, but they do not represent a scientific causality. Plastic pollution, river banks and urban poverty are real problems – but they are not caused by climate change. Equality of every instance of environmental stress with global warming makes a bad service for real science, distracts from local accountability and converts a complex problem into a clickbait spectacle.
Anthony Watts
Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for the environment and climate at the Heartland Institute. Watts has been working as an on-air TV in the weather business and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instruments and papers prepared together with specialist problems. He operates the most viewed website of the world in the climate, the award -winning website wattsupwiththat.com.
Quote in the climateREALISM
Like this:
Load…
Related
Do you discover more from watts?
Subscribe to the latest posts to your e -mail.
