Prophecy, Science, and Fake News, Oh My!

The Deluge, by John Martin, 1834. Oil on canvas.
A depiction of Noah's Ark
Prophet
  • one who utters divinely inspired revelations
  • one gifted with more than ordinary spiritual and moral insight
  • one who foretells future events 
  • an effective or leading spokesman for a cause, doctrine, or group
Prophecy
  • an inspired utterance of a prophet
  • the function or vocation of a prophet 
  • prediction of something to come

False Prophet

In religion, a false prophet is one who falsely claims the gift of prophecy or divine inspiration, or who uses that gift for evil ends. Often, someone who is considered a "true prophet" by some people is simultaneously considered a "false prophet" by others, even within the same religion as the "prophet" in question. The term is sometimes applied outside religion to describe someone who fervently promotes a theory that the speaker thinks is false.


Consider your "Case Study" readings and what you have learned over the course of the semester.

  1. How can the article in New York Magazine be considered prophecy, fake news or perhaps just a demonstration of a post-truth era?    
  2. Using this framework, why might Scott Pruitt, head of the EPA reply to the release of the new climate science report by the US Global Climate Change Research Program by stating,  
“Obviously the climate is changing and has always changed, [and] humans contribute to that. Measuring with exact precision is very challenging,” he told USA Today. “So I think the report [is] good to encourage an open dialogue on this.”
Responses should be about 300 words and due the last class day, November 30th by 11:59pm.


Comments

  1. The article that I read from the New York times has a lot of information about climate change. The article is extremely detailed, scholarly, and it outlines the many different factors that the human race is facing and will face in the years to come. I think this could be seen as a prophecy in a few different ways. Firstly, there is no denying that the ice caps are melting and the seas level will continue to rise. There is also no denying that the air we breathe is vitally important to our survival on this planet, and we need to focus on cleaner air and less air pollution. I think Scott Pruitt the head of the EPA is spot on with what he is saying. He is clearly trying to bring more attention to the subject while not voicing his personal opinion. There is no precise way to measure what is happening or how the climate is changing. However, as people who live by morals we can all agree that what we are doing is having an impact on our planet and it will continue until we make a conscience decision to change it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would say that this article from the New York Times is in several ways, a prophecy. It’s a prophecy in the sense that it talks about doomsday a lot and how the earth is going to be affected by climate change in the future. It uses statistics and data to talk about rising sea levels and polar ice caps melting. It talks about how even those who have anxiety about climate change and the fate of the world, they aren’t anxious enough because it’s going to be way worse than we think. It goes through different scenarios and different ways that things like food and other important factors will be affected in the future by climate change. This could be seen as fake news by some people. People who would see it as fake news would be people who think that climate change is just a hoax and that this article is just an activist trying to push an agenda into the mainstream discussion. You could say that it’s post truth by looking at all the scary predictions it makes and say that those are just scare tactics and that it is just trying to manipulate people’s emotions instead of just presenting objective facts and letting people decide for themselves. When it comes to Scott Pruitt, I think he is just trying to stay neutral on this point and is trying not to make a controversial comment. He admits that climate change is real to an extent and that it was caused by humans but puts a caveat in there by saying that “it’s hard to measure” because the administration he works for most likely won’t do much regarding climate change.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The "Doomsday" article was absolutely an example of post-truth in that it portrayed all of our worst fears about climate change. Blending fiction and science at times it was targeted not so much at skeptics, who would probably just shield their eyes and look away, and more towards the people who want to change the way things are going on our planet. It was a definite contrast to the US climate change report which tried to avoid these kinds of frightening images and stick with the facts of what is happening now as compared to pre-industrial times (which basically prove that humans are guilty.) I think it was wise of the EPA to tread softly when talking about climate change as to avoid triggering people who might dismiss it instantly as a hoax or a prophecy. Like he says, once an "open dialogue" begins on the topic the facts will speak for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  4. After reading the article from New York Times I would say that it is a prophecy for many different reasons. The article not only give very detailed information about "doomsday" but also climate change and the affect that it has on the world. The article gets its point across by using data and scholarly readings/examples. It has been proven that the ice caps are melting and causing sea level rise which is talked about throughout the article which is another great example. The article also goes into detail about how we as humans need to do something about the changes and realize that there will be a huge impact if we don’t. As for Scott Pruitt I think he is doing a great job. He is stating his opinion in way which doesn’t seem to offend anyone but also getting the point across to everyone. Overall he is trying to get people to wake up and realize climate change is real and if we as humans don’t do something to change or help we are doomed.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The article in the New York Times Magazine is clearly a prophecy that is created to make you wonder and possibly worry what might happen in our future. Prophecies are basically predictions claimed to be facts and generally warn or inform you of the near future. This article serves as just that with information about weather catastrophes that most people do not realize are a looming threat along with rising sea levels. Mentioning the common misconception of what a world surrounded with anarchy is like (Mad Max wasteland) adds to the idea of this article being a prophecy because it discredits what most people think will happen, providing a more real and ethical explanation. When you think of a prophecy you probably flashback to stories like Percy Jackson and other mythical concepts of someone being able to predict the future. This time, it is back with facts and real word problems that affect us every day, our climate. Bringing into view the expedited melting of the ice caps is more of a scientific fact than prophecy but what will happen because of that and when is the more prophet style information. Scott Pruitt head of EPA stated that this article is good to open dialogue but also mentions that it is hard to measure climate change in our world. He seems to not fully agree with the article but views it as a good footnote for opening up discussion about this topic on different forefronts. I believe he responded to this article so people would not be so frightened by its contents and to possibly calm the hype behind this growing idea of harmful climate change. Overall I believe this article is a prophecy in nature because of its contents but having facts backed behind it makes it more believable. To add to that Scott Pruitt is trying to calm media by stating this article should not be taken completely to heart but should be addressed accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The article in the New York Times Magazine is clearly a prophecy that is created to make you wonder and possibly worry what might happen in our future. Prophecies are basically predictions claimed to be facts and generally warn or inform you of the near future. This article serves as just that with information about weather catastrophes that most people do not realize are a looming threat along with rising sea levels. Mentioning the common misconception of what a world surrounded with anarchy is like (Mad Max wasteland) adds to the idea of this article being a prophecy because it discredits what most people think will happen, providing a more real and ethical explanation. When you think of a prophecy you probably flashback to stories like Percy Jackson and other mythical concepts of someone being able to predict the future. This time, it is back with facts and real word problems that affect us every day, our climate. Bringing into view the expedited melting of the ice caps is more of a scientific fact than prophecy but what will happen because of that and when is the more prophet style information. Scott Pruitt head of EPA stated that this article is good to open dialogue but also mentions that it is hard to measure climate change in our world. He seems to not fully agree with the article but views it as a good footnote for opening up discussion about this topic on different forefronts. I believe he responded to this article so people would not be so frightened by its contents and to possibly calm the hype behind this growing idea of harmful climate change. Overall I believe this article is a prophecy in nature because of its contents but having facts backed behind it makes it more believable. To add to that Scott Pruitt is trying to calm media by stating this article should not be taken completely to heart but should be addressed accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  7. After reading the New York Times article, it is easy to see that it provides many logical arguments as to what climate change could cause and destroy in the near future. It cites multiple scholarly sources and statistics to back up the author's statements as well. I see this article as prophecy because the author is predicting things like a food shortage, death by heat, and unbreathable air. Each point that he states is very credible and overall leaves the reader with a sense of urgency to help fight the issue of climate change. I think that Scott Pruitt was very careful with his statement, making sure that he generally agreed that climate change is a problem and that we should do something about it. At the same time, he did not state his exact opinion but more of a broad statement that he knew believers of climate change would agree with him on. Pruitt also mentioned that the report would encourage open dialogue, implying that conversation between both believers and non-believers of climate change would be happening.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I believe this article is acting as a major prophecy. I also believe this article is imposing all of the future damages as truth because they seem to have truth in the amount of carbon within the permafrost. This seems to be true because I did research on how much carbon is in the permafrost and an article posted by National Snow and Ice Indicator says that there is just about the same amount of carbon in the permafrost as in the atmosphere. They also acknowledge they are not sure how much carbon would be released if all permafrost melts. I believe this New York Times article is acting as a prophecy because they pose future issues with the possibilities of the continuation of climate change, and where it is heading into the future. By reading the quote from Scott Pruitt, it seems to me as if he acknowledges the problem of climate change and the fact that he seems to be willing to be open to conversation relating to climate change. The first step of aiding climate change is to acknowledge and identify the problems. Maybe there is hope in our society.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The article in the New York Magazine, I consider to be post-truth in the form of prophecy. The article talks about climate change scientifically using research done to back up the claims being made so it shouldn’t be categorized as fake news. The article is predicting a story of what might happen if we reach a level of climate change that is dangerous. The article lists very disturbing possibilities of climate change catastrophes such as, “Heat Death, The End of Food, Climate Plagues, Unbreathable Air,” and “Perpetual War.” All of these topics are addressed in the article and elaborates on what would happen within these epidemics and why. The way they are worded though creates a picture of fear and incredible danger. It is not just these headings that cause these feelings but the article itself, for example, the first sentence in the article is, “It is, I promise, worse than you think”. These types of words and their connotations can appeal to the emotions of people, making the article a demonstration of the post-truth era. I say that is in the form of prophecy because the author is foretelling a very possible future and it’s imminent events. For Scott Pruitt, I believe he is trying to stay neutral, as the head of the EPA but also as part of the current administration. Under this administration climate change is not important, not a priority, and essentially laughed at. Pruitt has two roles to play, and if he doesn’t do well, there will be a replacement ready. As head of the EPA he needs to admit climate change is real which he did, but as part of the administration he does not offer a possible solution even though he is rolling back the Clean Power Act, he only says that the report, “encourage[s] an open dialogue.” I believe Pruitt responded this way because he is scared of being replaced, but also of not doing a good and meaningful job.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The article in New York Magazine would be considered prophecy. It makes predictions based on the most dire possibilities similar to the examples from old England in The Atlantic article. People who wholeheartedly believe in climate change will read the New York Magazine and likely be alarmed at all the possible ways that humans could be erased from the globe. Climate skeptics will likely read the article and consider it to be more alarmist science that is based on inaccurate models rather than facts. If climate change is what you fear, than the New York Magazine article would possibly spur you to action. If climate change isn't a fear of yours than your day probably continued as normal.
    The quote by Scott Pruitt shows a measured approach. He doesn't deny climate change, but he also doesn't speak in terms that paint climate change as a problem. To Scott Pruitt climate change is just an ongoing fact of life. To people who fear climate change Scott Pruitt would probably be a false prophet as he talks about climate change likes it no big deal. He takes their biggest fear and makes it sound like just another regular change of the seasons. To climate skeptics Scott Pruitt is probably just another person in a suit who confirms their beliefs. Pruitt confirms that they should continue with their lives as they see fit, without regards for climate concerns.

    ReplyDelete
  11. After reading the article from the New York Times, I tried connecting the dots and concluded that it in fact could serve as prophecy in some sense. I liked his scare tactic attitude towards the matter of "Doomsday". He pretty much gave you everything that could possibly be feared about climate change and told you exactly how it's going to kill you if you don't start contributing to a solution. I appreciated how statistical the article was as well, it wasn't just an opinionated warning of the end yet to come. In today's world, maybe that's how to really get the message across, fear. If people haven't listened to the countless warnings by scientists and experts for years, then maybe the world will listen when climate change really "hits home". Scott Pruitt elaborated on this through what I would understand to be a more neutral or a "neither here nor there" attitude towards the subject. He basically said that climate change is real and it is affecting us, but so has it always. He understands that finding a solution and implementing it is not going to be an easy task but he also finished off his statement on a positive note by encouraging those who've read the article to heed its warning. These are the kind of milestones in warning that we all need to be weary of, or like the article states, we will all reach our doomsday.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The "Doomsday" article that we read from the New York Times could be considered a post-truth, as well as a prophecy. Although it contained facts about climate change and the devastating effects it will have on the planet, it played heavily on peoples emotions and fears. The title itself is intimidating. The facts are definitely there, such as rising temperatures, thawing permafrost, and rising sea levels, however the use of words like, "horrifically inhospitable," and "destruction" have a very powerful effect on readers. As the author relays important and real scientific evidence of climate change and global warming, he simultaneously creates a picture of terror and ruin. Looking at Scott Pruitt's reply to the new climate science report by the US Global Climate Change Research Program, it's good to see that he is acknowledging that humans contribute to climate change, but it also seems that he greatly undermines how much humans contribute. By starting his statement by saying, "Obviously the climate is changing and has always changed," it normalizes modern climate change and makes it seem less urgent. He also mentions the difficulty of precisely measuring the effects of climate change which takes credibility away from climate scientists. By saying that it is hard to be exact, he is creating doubt towards the research that scientists have done.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The article in the New York magazine would be considered prophecy at least by me. I believe this because it is talking about how the changing states of our climate can affect our future. Weather you believe in it or not, the earth is warming and the side effects of this are being seen now as the ice is melting, the greenhouse gases are rising, and along with that and the previously frozen permafrost layer is thawing out exposing the seed bank that was created for times that would be considered post-apocalyptic and the human race would need the plants for survival. It also stated that with the warming and elevated gases, that we would have cool periods in the now near future that would still be hotter than our hot periods now.

    I believe that the head of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, would reply to this by saying that the climate has always changed and will continue to change along with humans influencing it because it is true that it has always been changing but we are now the reason it is changing more rapidly and they want more attention on the issue of climate change. He believes that in the post truth era that having an open discussion about it will eventually prove to be more beneficial that pushing it aside as some people do today and that’s why we are seeing such record breaking changes to our climate so far.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I believe the article is an example of Prophecy. "Doomsday" appeared to use selective information that eluded to the gloom outcome of our planet. With the use of statistics, data, and recent events of the last few decades, the article predicts the fate of the world to be nearly uninhabitable within the next 100 years. While it is hard to accurately predict the future, there is enough modern evidence that is already occurring to infer that the climate is changing at a rapid pace. I think those who say this is "fake news" are the ones who do not believe in climate change and see it as a hoax or something that will not effect us anytime soon. Certain aspects could be seen in the "post-truth" category as well, as this article uses specific information to alarm the reader with a sense of urgency and can appeal to fear as a tactic. There should be no question that the climate is changing, and humans are a driving factor of it. The premonitions are apparent, so I believe this article is accurate in its heed of warning, although the author is not "all knowing." I believe Scott Pruitt does a good job on getting his point across without offending anyone. The sense of urgency is still there, and we do need to wake up and realize the situation at hand as he and the vast majority of scientists explain, or doomsday will become a reality.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The New York Times article is definitely an example of prophecy. Literally part I of the article is called "Doomsday": something that is clearly not backed by scientific data that proves anything about the FUTURE. Obviously we have statistics from the past, and we know at least a little bit about how our actions affect the environment currently. However, predicting the future would be considered prophecy to some- under any circumstance. The article uses multiple strategies in attempt to inspire change in the way our environment is being treated. The article uses harsh language such as "Uninhabitable" and "plagues". These are just two examples but there are many others within the article. The article also references factual information to further its arguments, explaining information including a rise in earth's temperature. I thought Scott Pruitt took a pretty moderate stance on the climate report, and especially moderate considering he is the head of the EPA. A moderate statement makes sense in a way, since it won't piss anybody off, but I feel like the leader of an organization that has the power to literally change the world should take a stiffer stance on such news. I’m not sure if he’s an elected official, but he’s not a politician. And this isn’t an issue to appeal to the majority about- if the majority is wrong. We’re talking about the world, where we live. We only have one of them believe it or not, so we need to protect it while we can.

    ReplyDelete

Popular Posts