Three Semester Review
My experience in SGC has benefited me greatly in the way that, by proxy of being in this program, I've absorbed knowledge of the scientific method, deduction skills, warranted skepticism and many other facets of being a good scientist/researcher. These have and will continue to help me understand and analyze the world around me, and especially being in a major where skepticism is rampant and misinformation reigns true.
Firstly, the hypothetico-deductive method, or the scientific method. As an example, for my geology course, we were asked to find a research question that we could answer using earth observation satellites and the data that they bring and employ. I chose to use the TERRA MODIS and the LANDSATs 8 and 9, satellites that provide the NDVI of an area using red and NIR bands, which greenery is highly reflective in. With this data, I wanted to see whether the 2012 Brazilian Forest Code revision, an event which, among other things, was supposed to help mitigate rampant illegal logging in most of the Amazon which rests in Brazil, was actually dissuading the illegal logging and living up to the promises and regulations it set out, changes that would keep the rainforest alive for longer, protecting many endangered species and some of the last untouched rainforest on earth. My hypothesis was that these regulations were not being enforced nearly heavily enough, and that the government of certain states, in my case specifically the state of Mato Grosso, were knowingly allowing this to happen as logging is a large source of income for that region, with the state having the highest logging rate of any. Testing this hypothesis, I gathered the data points of NDVI in 2001, 2012, and 2023, subtracting forest cover from 2001 from 2012. If this value was negative in an area, it indicated forest loss, and if it was positive indicated forest gain. I did this same process for 2012 and 2023, and unfortunately, my hypothesis was correct, and it seemed like from 2012 onward, the amount of negative areas were much more than the original 2001-2012. This proved that the changes made in legislation weren't enough, and there needed to be major changes in law to ensure that this acceleration in deforestation didn't get exponentially worse. The way SGC taught me to approach problems from all sides and to produce my own data and research helped me make this project possible. It also taught me well to make sure I was strict in my data collection and ran multiple tests.
I have observed a decent amount of climate alarmists in public that give us a bad rep as climatologists, spouting and regurgitating information to a point where its too outlandish for even a regular person to believe, failing to use the scientific method and perform self research, often seeing a sensationalist new piece and clinging to it without looking deep into it themselves. For instance, I have heard countless times that we've almost used up all the fossil fuel in the world and that we will be forced to switch to electric cars when we do eventually run out soon. This statement is wrong and harmful, as the big companies that mine or use these fossil fuels know that there isn't that much of a shortage right now, and with them supposedly going to have to change when they run out, it is harmful in two ways, both allowing them to just coast along with spewing and producing vehicles and devices that spew tonnes of CO2 into the air with the nonexistent deterrent of "they'll run out of those soon enough, there's no reason to act or worry as they will be forced." The other reason is that it absolves them of the responsibility to put into place new standards or cut back on emissions, as apparently they will be running out of supply anyway (they won't). Lastly, this claim is just completely unsubstantiated, as almost every peer reviewed scientific paper I've read has said nearly the opposite, that we still have at least 100 years of fossil fuels remaining at this rate. They have failed to use the hypothetico-deductive method and instead relied on other people to do it for them, people with interests other than their own most likely, and I can realize this due to SGC and perform tests, like I have, on these outlandish statements using strict methodology.
Additionally, in my AOSC201 class, we were required to generate our own and analyze skew-T diagrams that would demonstrate the way the atmosphere was behaving at different heights in regards to pressure and many other things, and what weather events would occur during certain skew-Ts. Using the doctrines learned in SCG, I was able to perform multiple accurate tests and corroborate data with other credible sources to support my answers to each question by employing self-testing and using multiple credible sources. Another class was AOSC200, where, doing heat island effect tests, i was able to use smaller scale models to test different building colors and types, and came up with a paper on how to design a city optimally to mitigate as much of the heat island effect as possible, and by doing my own research and remaining skeptical of the seemingly obvious methods, I was able to generate a city plan that minimized cost and heat island effect as much as possible.
My learning was enhanced by this living-learning situation as i was able to have intelligent discourse with like minded people who have similar interests, which actually led to us forming some AOSC groups where we analyzed methane concentration around UMD, which ended up landing me an internship with Dr Zeng, boosting my learning even more, as we are now studying carbon sequestration and wood vault. I think I have contributed at least a little to SGC by using the doctrines and skills taught to help create many new openings for SGC students like the methane project as well as helping Dr Zeng if he needs extra help. Scholars, rather than challenging my beliefs, put me in contact with people with similar beliefs, and this allowed me to expand my horizons relating to them, and fully flesh out my interest in certain facets that, without scholars, I probably would not have felt compelled to participate in. My beliefs have been bolstered and my understanding has been brought to another level in which I can feel like almost an expert in this field of carbon sequestration. This scholar's experience will inform my future by making me more avid in finding cracks and contradictions in information and finding the truth in a situation where it is possible. I plan to use the justified skepticism quite a bit, as this is the basis on which a multitude of theses are based off of.
