Glaciers (Impacts and Hazard)

[Fishteacher73]

One problem (Especially for environmental science) is that you have many groups talking about many of the problems. Some of these groups are funded and backed by many of the larger chemical/petrolium companies that really prefer to keep the status quo. If you phrase the question right and pick the appropriate test sites, you can get the results you are hoping for. Many times we also forget that the Earth is a very large place and events in one area may be contradictory to events in another.

Environmental science is probably the second most debated area in science (Pulling in many that are not science buffs) after evolution. The problem unfortunatly is that the debate on evolution really has no bearing on much aside from what goes in the textbook (From a laymans POV). Environmental science has a huge impact on many peoples day-to-day lives. Everything from jobs and economy to carcinogens and population growth.

Like many things in the modrn world, people do not always examine the information that they have been given and often follow ambiguous or misleading "studies" without too much understanding of what is actually going on. This is on both sides of the equation. One example was an add taken out in the Sierra Club magazine. It warned about the global diffusion of oxygen dihydride. Stating, "There are dectable amounts in every water source on the globe." As a kneejerk reaction there sprang up a few groups opposed to the use of oxygen dihyride. They were amazed to learn that they were arguing against water.