Op-Ed: Is smearing food on the ‘Mona Lisa’ a productive form of climate change protest?
At times of growing national and global concern over climate change, some activists focus on the role of painting and graffiti (as well as other forms of artistic expression) on the ‘Mona Lisa’ in the shape of a human face. Such efforts may be intended to protest the ‘inhuman’ effects of climate change and/or the exploitation of the environment.
Others, however, may not agree with this particular form of artistic expression and, consequently, they seek to shut it down through smear campaigns. Such campaigns involve the deliberate attempt to discredit climate change science, undermine efforts to combat global warming and smear those who take these efforts to heart.
We will investigate whether these campaigns are really effective at bringing about climate change awareness and why climate scientists believe that these smear campaigns are potentially damaging to the development of the scientific consensus about the causes of climate change.
A key criticism of these smear campaigns is that they do not work. While an examination of the science has found that human-induced climate change is occurring, the evidence that human activity is the dominant or sole cause of climate change remains highly inconclusive. While ‘climate denialists’ are quick to point this out, they are often unable to demonstrate the effect of their campaigns.
What is the science on climate change?
There are many different scientific methods of investigating climate change. One of the most important is the use of statistical data to examine the effects of climate change. This type of statistical data is examined at the country level, as well as at the individual level. For example, some believe that the effects of climate change are most severe in those areas that are most densely populated. In such a case, a correlation between the rate of population increase and the severity of climate change could be used to infer a link.
More than 150 million people are in areas of high population growth and where the rate of population increase is higher than the rate of natural increase. This means that the regions most affected by climate change are also the most densely populated. In addition, research in this area has found that areas with the highest rates of migration also have the highest rates of climate change. This means that the increase in population, driven by migration, could be as a result of climate change (that is, climate change is contributing to the growth of
