Wes McCoy’s article, “What Does It Mean to be Human? Science and Faith at the Hall of Human Origins,” in the February 2024 issue of SciTech†, ending with this statement: “BSIC members were also asked to provide their own explanation regarding the role of humans in the Anthropocene Age. In a follow up article, I will discuss my own views on this topic.” This is his follow up article.
Each member of the Broader Social Impacts Committee at the Hall of Human Origins at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History has been asked to provide their own explanation regarding the role of humans in the Anthropocene Age. The Hall of Human Origins exhibit makes clear that climate change throughout history has driven many of the changes we see in populations of human ancestors. As a science teacher and a faithful Christian, I try to write documents that my high school students can understand and discuss.
I usually start high school science lessons by explaining the kinds of data scientists are able to collect now and compare that to the sorts of data that could be measured in the past. I was a high school student myself in 1972 when I purchased a paperback titled The Limits to Growth, written by a group called The Club of Rome. Comprised of seventy professionals from twenty-five different nations, The Club of Rome chose to identify a set of interrelated problems facing humanity into the 21st Century: population growth, food availability, toxins accumulating on land and sea, gas accumulations in the atmosphere and heat accumulation worldwide. At the time, I thought their work was certainly one of the most comprehensive compilations of data up to that moment.
But scientists face many challenges when collecting such data. Each nation must count its own population. Many countries do not have the resources to measure toxins. In 1972, air sampling for CO2 and other gases was much harder than it is now. Very few multi-spectral scanners had been placed into orbit in 1972, so quantifying the amount of photosynthesis on land and in the oceans was very hard to accomplish.
Now, however, the evidence for human-caused global climate distortion is both compelling and overwhelming. As an example, the predictions of CO2accumulation in Earth’s atmosphere over the years leading up to the year 2000 were predicted very accurately by the Club of Rome in 1972. In addition to data from thousands of scientists over several decades, schoolchildren readily demonstrate the climate-changing effects of carbon dioxide and methane in half-hour laboratory investigations. Many 9th graders today can load test tubes with gases: one with methane, one with water vapor, one with carbon dioxide and place the tubes under a warm lamp. Within thirty minutes the temperatures in those three tubes become vastly different, showing without doubt that these three gases hold onto heat in different ways. My students see with their own eyes how quickly atmospheric temperatures can rise. Without interventions, the long-term effects of global climate distortion will be devastating. The longer we delay interventions, the greater the risk and the cost of repairing the damage that will occur.
Despite these facts, some people choose to reject the consensus of 97% of the world’s climate scientists and the massive evidence collected over the past seventy years. It is true that scientific ideas sometimes receive pushback in the classroom, whether studying tobacco use or HIV/AIDS or evolution or climate science. Most American adults over the age of thirty have not been taught about climate change in school, which compounds the problem.
Science is based on measurements
Science is not based on belief, but on measurements. Most schools in the US are now teaching students how to plan and carry out investigations, analyze data, and argue from evidence. Therefore, scientific arguments should focus on measurements, often called data. (For clarity, I usually use the word “measurements” when explaining things to younger students, and then shift to the term “data” later in the semester). Some people not only question climate science, but the integrity of scientists. We need to recognize that such attacks serve primarily to distract from actual evidence and delay necessary changes in our policies. Science denial is the most serious hindrance to public understanding for the choices we face in the Age of the Anthropocene.
The core practice of education is developing a relationship of trust. The starting point for teachers is helping students feel valued, safe, and welcome in an atmosphere of academic challenge. Fortunately, many families think of a careful science education as key to enhancing success in a global marketplace. Parents view a trustworthy teacher as a partner. To be trustworthy, a teacher does not need to know everything, but should be a reliable guide to understanding the best science available.
We do well to remember the self-correcting nature of science. Science is both collaborative and highly competitive, and new research is published daily. New measurements are always being evaluated to see if they may cause us to reject or support a scientific model or explanation. Just as more orbital multispectral cameras provide us with a more comprehensive view of the Earth, adding more reliable climate data helps us to modify our explanations so we can be more confident in our claims. Data can reveal points where we need more clarity. For example, reliable sources such as the Smithsonian, the AAAS, and NASA have identified a need for more precise projections of future sea level rise so that local agencies may avoid duplicating efforts to protect human communities and coastal ecosystems.
We should listen carefully to questions individuals pose about climate change. Some questions, such as “Is climate change caused by humans?” reveal two ideas. The individual accepts that climate change is occurring but wonders about the causes. Those are two separate notions. We must avoid the trap of dividing people into “pro vs con groups.” Otherwise, we risk assuming that there are only two ways to think.
Finally, we can live our lives as active learners. We can prepare ourselves as climate change educators by evaluating current climate science data so we can suggest sources for further reading. Let your dialogue with individuals include statements like “I wondered about the same thing myself.” Educators always plant seeds of ideas for future consideration.
I encourage all readers of this article to visit the Smithsonian’s Hall of Human Origins website and investigate both the unity and diversity of human religious and scientific thought found there.
