The Climate Changes Campaign Is Possibly Backfire, Study Says By Menahem, Zen email@example.com | Jul 24, 2017 02:51 PM EDT In the series of commentary papers, seven authors have noticed some serious drawbacks in the climate changes campaign that emphasize on the minimalist claim such as "human caused 97% of the climate changes." Such claims and the messages have created public confusion and fueled some menial debates. The authors have published their commentary in the Environmental Communication. The first author of the commentaries is a faculty member of the Department of Sociological Studies at the University of Sheffield, Warren Pearce. Another notable author is the Professor of Science and Technology Studies at the University of Nottingham, Reiner Grundmann. Both Pearce and Grundmann, along with Mike Hulme, Sujatha Raman, Eleanor Hadley Kershaw and Judith Tsouvalis, they presented an undisputed fact of the drawbacks faced by the climate changes campaign. Watch video "The '97% consensus' has become a popular slogan for climate campaigners, but the strategy is self-defeating," Grumann said to point out the failed climate changes campaign. "There is a danger of overreach in that numbers." Campaign that emphasized on the bombastic data have potential drawbacks in three aspects. The first one is intense disagreement as a result of such claims. The strategy of conveying the message with exaggerated numbers in climate changes campaign has created a continuous debate about the menial thing such as the correct numbers of the statement, instead of correcting the action. The second drawback is that public has started to doubt the and challenged the climate changes campaign. They demand more evidence that climate changes are really happening. While the last drawback is that public does not need a scientific consensus to support solution for their environmental problems. This is clearly shown in the U.S. when a decade before Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer was signed in 1987. Americans have shifted their product to use chemicals that did not destroy ozone layers, making the scientific consensus ten years late.