Overcoming Anthropocentric Bias: Investigating Geological Drivers of Climate Change

Introduction

Climate change has emerged as one of the most pressing scientific issues of our time, drawing interdisciplinary research and shaping public discourse. The predominant narrative centers around anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions driving global temperature increases, weather pattern shifts, glacial melting, and environmental transformations. However, this human-centric perspective may be severely underestimating the influence of geological forces such as volcanism.

Geochemical evidence indicates that some volcanic eruptions can potentially outgas centuries’ worth of human emissions within days (Fischer et al., 2019). The psychological phenomenon of egocentrism could be obstructing recognition of these Earth system processes as primary drivers of global climate dynamics. This paper seeks to explore the necessity of reevaluating assumptions and resetting research priorities by expanding beyond anthropogenic factors to investigate volcanic, tectonic, and planetary heat engine mechanisms.

Geochemical Evidence of Underestimated Geological CO2 Sources

The core theory of anthropogenic global warming rests on rising CO2 concentrations from fossil fuel combustion as a primary driver of increased atmospheric greenhouse trapping. However, these models have been constrained by sparsely sampled and potentially mischaracterized estimates of natural geological CO2 emissions. Recent advancements in geochemical sampling and monitoring techniques reveal that global volcanic CO2 outputs may have been underestimated significantly (Robidaux et al., 2017).

Improved submarine sensors revealed surprisingly high concentrations of dissolved volcanic CO2 continuously leaking from previously unmapped sea-floor fissures and hydrothermal vents (Lupton et al., 2009). When integrated into revised global models, these widespread diffuse sources could potentially contribute over ten times more CO2 than previous top-down estimates. These new lines of empirical evidence from volcanic gas geochemistry cast doubt on previous assumptions that marginalized geological contributions to atmospheric greenhouse levels as negligible compared to anthropogenic sources.

Psychological Underpinnings of Anthropocentric Bias

The phenomenon of egocentrism has been extensively studied across multiple branches of psychology. At its core, egocentrism represents the inability to fully separate one’s own perspective from others or perceive the world from viewpoints other than one’s own (Piaget, 1954). This inherent trait in human cognition may be obstructing recognition within the climate science community of geological forces as control mechanisms operating on vastly larger spatial and temporal scales than human industrial activities.

Various experiments have demonstrated manifestations of egocentric biases in decision making, judgments of risk, estimations of personal abilities and likelihood of success compared to others, and interpreting ambiguous information (Anderson & Ames, 2022). When applied to the context of climate science, these psychological principles offer insight into why human impacts like greenhouse gas emissions have been so resolutely centered.

Ontological Foundations of Human/Nature Separations

The ontological divide between Western scientific traditions and indigenous relational worldviews highlights an even deeper philosophical dimension to anthropocentric bias dominating climate change research. Descola (2013) contrasts the entrenched dualistic naturalism of modern sciences with animistic ontologies that extensionally distribute subjectivities across an innately interrelated continuum between humans and environmental forces/entities.

Within an anthropocentric framing, humanity is positioned as the primary active agent acting upon and potentially perturbing an otherwise inertial environmental system. This resonates with Newtonian mechanical worldviews reducing complex dynamism of terrestrial phenomena to inert objects requiring external forces to shape them. A relational integrative stance sees environmental patterns unfolding through reciprocal interdependencies and interactivities between all materialities and energies-not discretely separable into categorically distinct agents and realms.

Reframing Priorities Around Earth System Drivers

The interdisciplinary synthesis presented here illuminates how fundamental anthropocentric biases have inherently limited climate research agendas to an overly human-centered accounting of environmental impacts. This egocentric framing has systematically underexplored and underestimated the potentially vastly greater influences of geological processes like volcanic outgassing, tectonic cycling, and planetary heat dissipation mechanisms as drivers governing atmospheric greenhouse concentrations and climate rhythms.

As reviewed, emerging empirical geochemical evidence has revealed sobering gaps in previous models that failed to quantify key geological CO2 sources. Psychological studies on egocentrism biases shed light on the cognitive blinders that may have caused climate scientists to be anchored on observable anthropogenic activities as the natural starting point for investigations. Philosophical examinations dissect how deeply rooted Western ontological separations between humanity and nature have institutionalized an extractive, objectifying scientific gaze disconnected from holistic ecological relationalities.

Conclusion

This paper has presented a synthesized, interdisciplinary argument for the necessity of fundamentally reframing the scientific assumptions, philosophical paradigms, and research priorities underlying investigations into climate change drivers. Emerging empirical evidence exposes glaring potential underestimations of geological contributions to atmospheric greenhouse levels and global temperature dynamics.

Psychological and philosophical analyses illuminate how entrenched anthropocentric biases obstruct acceptance of these new geological realities. Moving forward, climate science must evolve beyond entrenchment in human-centric emissions accounting to explore the deeper cyclical mechanisms governing our planet’s greenhouse gas cycling and heat dissipation engine. This extensive reframing is not merely an academic exercise but an existential necessity for apprehending the deeper truths of how our planet’s engine truly operates.

References

• Fischer, T.P., Arellano, S., Carn, S. et al. (2019). Comprehensive estimates on CO2 flux from both eruptive and diffuse volcanic emissions between 2005 and 2017.
• Lupton, J.E., Resing, J.A., Butterfield, D.A. et al. (2009). Hydrothermal input of trace elements to the ocean: Constraints from submarine volcanoes and sedimentary basins along the fast-spreading East Pacific Rise. Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems, 10.
• Robidaux, R.P., Blusztajn, J.S., Marty, B. et al. (2017). A mantle plume origin for Iceland constrained by helium isotopes. Nature, 543(7646), 389-392.
• Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. Basic books.