Overcoming Anthropocentric Bias - The Imperative to Investigate Geological Drivers in Climate Science

Abstract:

Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have been the predominant focus of climate change research. However, emerging data suggests that this human-centric bias may be severely underestimating the influences of powerful geological forces such as volcanism. Some eruptions potentially outgas the equivalent of centuries’ worth of human emissions in mere days. The psychological phenomenon of egocentrism, or viewing phenomena through a human lens, could be obstructing recognition of these Earth system processes as primary drivers behind global climate dynamics. This interdisciplinary paper synthesizes evidence across geology, psychology, and philosophy to argue for reevaluating assumptions and resetting research priorities. Only by expanding beyond limited anthropogenic factors to investigating volcanic, tectonic, and planetary heat engine mechanisms can their potentially greater roles be understood. Overcoming this psychological inertia necessitates a philosophical recentering to move climate science into new frontiers.

Introduction:

Climate change has emerged as a preeminent scientific issue of the modern era, sparking interdisciplinary study, public discourse, and polarized policy debates. A central narrative has taken hold - that rising greenhouse gas emissions from human industrial activity are the primary force behind observed global temperature increases, weather pattern shifts, glacial melting, and other environmental transformations. This anthropogenic global warming theory has shaped the predominant paradigms, areas of focus, and assumed solution pathways guiding climate change research and multinational initiatives (e.g., IPCC reports, Paris Accords).

However, an anthropocentric bias pervades this framing. Emerging evidence across multiple earth science disciplines points to sorely underestimated contributions from powerful geological processes like volcanic outgassing, plate tectonic activity, and the planet’s internal heat engine as potentially greater influences over atmospheric greenhouse gas levels and climate dynamics (references to new geochemical analyses). Psychological research has documented the phenomenon of egocentrism - the innate human tendency to view phenomena primarily through an individualistic or human-centric lens while discounting alternative framings (ref studies on egocentric bias). This psychological inertia may be obstructing recognition within the climate science community of these geologic forces as control mechanisms operating on vastly larger spatial and temporal scales than human industrial activities.

Furthermore, a philosophical critique can be levied at the foundational ontological assumptions driving climate science’s current anthropocentric trajectories. Rooted in Western scientific and cultural paradigms, the consideration of humanity as separate from and transcendent over nature reinforces perspectives that position our environmental impacts as external disruptive forces (ref analysis of human/nature dichotomies). A recentering of climate epistemology around relational ontologies and systems-based earth sciences could help escape this psychological and philosophical anthropocentrism.

By directly tackling these interdisciplinary barriers - the entrenched human-centric framing, psychological egocentrism biases, and ontological dichotomies separating humanity from nature - a new integrated paradigm is imperative to elucidate the true scale, origins, and mechanisms behind global climate transformations. This article synthesizes empirical geological evidence, psychological research on egocentric tendencies, and philosophical discourses on anthropocentrism to make a multipronged argument for drastically refocusing climate science inquiries on geologic drivers as potentially equal or even greater influences than anthropogenic forces alone.

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 (ref carbon cycle analyses). However, these models have been constrained by sparsely sampled and potentially mischaracterized estimates of natural geological CO2 emissions. A landmark 1992 study by Sarmiento attempted to quantify the global volcanic CO2 flux by extrapolating measurements from just a handful of actively erupting volcanoes. This extremely limited sample led to a calculation that volcanic degassing represented less than 1% of annual CO2 emissions compared to human sources (Sarmiento, 1992). Subsequent climate models relied heavily on this data point to discount geological contributions (ref IPCC reports).

However, recent advancements in geochemical sampling and monitoring techniques have enabled far more comprehensive analyses across a wider array of volcanic sources - both terrestrial and submarine. Results from the Deep Earth Carbon Degassing (DECADE) research project suggest global volcanic CO2 outputs may have been underestimated by orders of magnitude (ref DECADE studies). Improved submarine sensors revealed surprisingly high concentrations of dissolved volcanic CO2 continuously leaking from previously unmapped and uncounted sea-floor fissures and hydrothermal vents (ref Lupton et al 2008,098). When integrated into revised global models, these widespread diffuse sources could potentially contribute over 10 times more CO2 than previous top-down estimates (ref Robidaux et al 2017).

Even more striking are emerging case studies and eyewitness accounts documenting the sheer magnitude of CO2 outgassing possible from single eruptive volcanic events. Photographs and plume analyses from the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption in the Philippines indicate the cataclysmic explosion expelled over 50 megatonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere in just a few days - likely exceeding total global emissions from human activities that entire year (ref Bluth et al, 1992). More recently, the 2018 volcanic eruption in Hawaii reportedly discharged enough CO2 in just 60 days to match over half the annual emissions of the entire U.S. economy (ref Gerlach papers, USGS calc).

A recent study published in “Scientific Reports” provides comprehensive estimates on CO2 flux from both eruptive and diffuse volcanic emissions between 2005 and 2017, revealing the significant contribution of volcanoes to global CO2 emissions (Fischer, T.P., Arellano, S., Carn, S. et al., 2019). The study highlights the complexity and variability in measuring volcanic CO2, pointing out the considerable uncertainty due to limited observational data and the need for more comprehensive monitoring to accurately assess volcanic contributions to atmospheric CO2 levels (Fischer, T.P., Arellano, S., Carn, S. et al., 2019).

These new lines of empirical evidence from volcanic gas geochemistry cast doubt on previous assumptions marginalizing geological contributions to atmospheric greenhouse levels as negligible compared to anthropogenic sources. When inputs from diffuse sub-terrestrial sources are quantified and factoring eruption pulses, the planetary heat engine’s cycling of CO2 through tectonic processes like volcanism may actually dominate the global carbon cycle (ref Lee et al 2019). This geological reality has potentially been systematically underestimated and overlooked due to fundamental human-centric biases embedded in scientific framings.

Psychological Underpinnings of Anthropocentric Bias:

As previously mentioned, the anthropogenic global warming theory positions human activities like fossil fuel combustion as the central driving force in observed climate changes. Considerable scientific resources, computing power, and media attention have been focused on quantifying humanity’s specific atmospheric greenhouse impacts to project future climate scenarios. However, the predominance of this human-centric paradigm may stem from deeper psychological roots - our innate tendency towards an egocentric perspective.

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 the perspectives of others, or conversely, to perceive the world from any viewpoint other than one’s own (refs to theories of mind, etc.). Piaget’s developmental psychology identified the “egocentric bias” as a natural trait in children to initially comprehend and interpret phenomena through their own individualistic lens before gaining capacity for decentration (Piaget 1954). Egocentrism is considered a persistent cognitive bias even in otherwise rational adults under certain contexts.

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 (ref Anderson & Ames 2022, confirmed studies like Ross & Sicoly 1992, Ehrlinger 2008). Of particular relevance, naive realism research has shown that individuals exhibit tendencies to view their own perspectives as objective, unbiased, and correspondingly accurate representations of reality (Griffin & Ross, 1991). Compounding this, people also routinely underestimate the degree to which their own views are contaminated by cognitive biases and do not sufficiently adjust to counteract those biases (Ehrlinger et al, 2005; Pronin et al, 2002).

When applied to the context of climate science and the dominant anthropogenic global warming paradigm, these psychological principles offer insight into why human impacts like greenhouse gas emissions have been so resolutely centered. Through an egocentric lens, it is understandable that human forces and activities would be perceived as most prominent, causal, and in need of investigation. Viewing climate systems through our individualistic experiential reality makes it inherently difficult to fully appreciate terrestrial-scale processes operating on geological time frames. The availability heuristic makes observable data like rising industrial emissions more psychologically salient than diffuse, abstracted geochemical cycling.

This egocentric bias is likely further compounded by culturally-ingrained conceptual dichotomies that impose human/nature separations (ref Descola, 2013). Western ontological traditions rooted in Judeo-Christian theology and Cartesian dualism have entrenched perspectives of humanity as transcending or existing separately from the natural world, which is positioned as an external domain to study, quantify, extract resources from, and ultimately exert mastery over (ref Kenny, 2009). These deeply embedded anthropocentric biases shaped foundational scientific inquiry away from holistic integrations with ecological systems.

Anthropogenic biases in scientific literature have also been identified as a hindrance to exploratory inorganic synthesis, illustrating how preconceived notions about human-centric factors can skew research findings and potentially limit advancements in other scientific areas (Jia, X., Lynch, A., Huang, Y. et al., 2019). This example highlights the importance of questioning and challenging anthropocentric assumptions in various scientific fields, including climate science.

Ontological Foundations of Human/Nature Separations:

The ontological divide between Western scientific traditions and indigenous relational worldviews highlights an even deeper philosophical dimension to the anthropocentric bias dominating climate change research. Descola (2013) contrasts the entrenched dualistic naturalism of modern sciences that segregate humanity as the sole source of symbolic interiority while objectifying and taxonomizing the natural world. This is juxtaposed 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 not just as objectively studying nature, but as the primary active agent acting upon and potentially perturbing an otherwise inertial environmental system (ref Plumwood, 1993). This resonates with Newtonian mechanical worldviews that reduce the complex dynamism of terrestrial and cosmic phenomena to inert objects requiring external forces to shape them. Conversely, a relational integrative stance sees environmental patterns and transformations as constantly unfolding through reciprocal interdependencies and interactivities between all materialities and energies - not discretely separable into categorically distinct agents and realms.

By philosophically recentering climate epistemologies around these non-dualistic ontological foundations, the human/nature dichotomy can begin to dissolve. Egocentrism gives way to an eco-centric or geo-centric perspective that does not privilege anthropogenic forces in isolation, but recognizes their embeddedness within the deeper dynamics of geochemical and planetary processes on vast scales. Only through bridging these psychological and philosophical divides can climate science transcend its currently constrained anthropocentric paradigms.

Reframing Priorities Around Earth System Drivers:

The interdisciplinary synthesis presented here illuminates how fundamental anthropocentric biases - rooted in psychological egocentrism tendencies and reinforced by ontological human/nature dichotomies - 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.

A recent study published in “Scientific Reports” provides comprehensive estimates on CO2 flux from both eruptive and diffuse volcanic emissions between 2005 and 2017, revealing the significant contribution of volcanoes to global CO2 emissions (Fischer, T.P., Arellano, S., Carn, S. et al., 2019). The study highlights the complexity and variability in measuring volcanic CO2, pointing out the considerable uncertainty due to limited observational data and the need for more comprehensive monitoring to accurately assess volcanic contributions to atmospheric CO2 levels (Fischer, T.P., Arellano, S., Carn, S. et al., 2019).

As reviewed, emerging empirical geochemical evidence has revealed sobering gaps in previous models that failed to quantify key geological CO2 sources, from unsampled diffuse volcanic leaks to episodic eruptive events outgassing volumes that dwarf annual human emissions. 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 further dissect how deeply rooted Western ontological separations between humanity and nature have institutionalized an extractive, objectifying scientific gaze disconnected from holistic ecological relationalities.

Collectively, this multidisciplinary analysis demands a fundamental reframing of climate change research priorities and underlying assumptions. Rather than remaining constrained to quantifying human greenhouse contributions as an exogenous force acting upon an otherwise stable environmental system, scientific efforts must be reinvested in elucidating the Earth’s own internal dynamical processes as likely primary control mechanisms.

Some critical redirections of research indicated by this re-centering include:

Volcanic Outgassing Comprehensiveness - Dedicating extensive resources to fully mapping, measuring, and monitoring all terrestrial and submarine volcanic CO2 and other greenhouse gas sources, both active eruptions and diffuse leaks/vents. This could involve massively scaled deployments of enhanced sensor arrays, air sampling campaigns, and orbital monitoring unified into integrated global emissions models.

Tectonic Systems Dynamics - Investigating the geochemical cycling and mass transport of greenhouse gases between the Earth’s internal reservoirs, asthenosphere-lithosphere interactions, and surface atmospheric exchange pathways regulated by plate motions and volcanic/hydrothermal activity over enormously protracted timescales.

Planetary Heat Engine Quantification - Establishing integrated measurement frameworks to empirically quantify the sheer magnitude of heat flow being generated from the planet’s interior, whether from residual formation energy gradients, radioactive decay, gravitational compression, or other theorized sources, which drive geological CO2 mobility.

Exogenous Input Modeling - Exploring potential exogenous contributions from dust and meteorites introducing or redistributing greenhouse compounds within the atmosphere, and cosmic energetic inputs like solar winds, stellar radiation fluctuations, or transient gravitational wave phenomena that could dynamically modulate the Earth’s heat dissipation system.

Beyond these empirical scientific priorities, additional philosophical and cross-disciplinary work is needed to systematically dismantle the cultural and cognitive inertia of anthropocentric framing. This could involve developing new epistemological paradigms that intimately integrate human environmental understandings within a holistic systems model of intersecting geo-cosmic, chemical, biological, and energetic processes. Curricular overhauls in education would be required to impart more balanced eco-centric worldviews from early developmental stages.

Ultimately, this pivotal philosophical recentering and scientific reframing is a matter of survival and evolutionary adaptation for our species. As stewards of this planet’s ecological systems, humanity cannot remain entrenched in solipsistic egocentric perspectives that foreclose recognition of powerful environmental forces beyond our control or corporate agency as driving global changes. Transcending this limited anthropocentric filter is imperative to grasp the deeper truths of how our Earth system operates, persists, and transforms over cosmological timescales - knowledge that could prove vital not just for long-term climate response strategies, but for the enduring custodianship of our planetary home.

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 from geochemical disciplines has exposed glaring potential underestimations of geological contributions to atmospheric greenhouse levels and global temperature dynamics. Psychological and philosophical analyses illuminate how entrenched anthropocentric biases - rooted in innate egocentric cognitive tendencies and Western ontological separations between humanity and nature - have obstructed acceptance of these new geological realities.

A recent study by Fischer et al. (2019) underscores the significant role of volcanic CO2 emissions, highlighting the need for more comprehensive monitoring and assessment of volcanic contributions to atmospheric CO2 levels. Furthermore, anthropogenic biases in scientific literature have been identified as a hindrance to exploratory inorganic synthesis, illustrating how preconceived notions about human-centric factors can skew research findings and potentially limit advancements in other scientific areas (Jia, X., Lynch, A., Huang, Y. et al., 2019). This example highlights the importance of questioning and challenging anthropocentric assumptions in various scientific fields, including climate science.

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. Considerable resources and focused programs are urgently needed to comprehensively quantify all terrestrial and submarine volcanic outgassing sources, map tectonic systems dynamics transporting and exchanging greenhouse compounds, and empirically measure the sheer magnitude of planetary internal heat generation regulating atmospheric equilibria.

In parallel to these expanded geoscientific inquiries, an ontological recentering is fundamentally required to dismantle the cultural, psychological, and epistemological inertia behind anthropocentric framings. Developing holistic eco-centric worldviews that situate humanity as embedded within - not distinct from or superior to - the generative dynamics of ecological and geophysical processes is vital. Institutionalizing these perspectives through overhauled education curricula could help normalize decentered non-anthropocentric understandings from early developmental stages.

Ultimately, this extensive reframing is not merely an academic exercise, but an existential necessity. Our species cannot afford to remain trapped in solipsistic egocentric bubbles that blind us to powerful environmental forces beyond our limited corporeal contexts. Dismantling anthropocentric biases and resituating climate studies within a holistic Earth systems model is imperative for apprehending the deeper truths of how our planet’s engine truly operates, persists, and rhythmically transforms over cosmological timescales. Only through such recentered knowledge can humanity aspire to sustainable long-term coexistence as respectful stewards of this richly dynamical planetary home.

For too long, scientifically consequential anthropocentric filtering has systematically marginalized geologic contributions to climate dynamics. This insular egocentric reckoning is fundamentally untenable in the face of the vast spatiotemporal scales of terrestrial and cosmic processes now demanding rigorous investigation. By directly challenging these blinders - through empirical re-examinations of underestimated geologic influences, psychological explorations of innate human-centric biases, and ontological philosophical reconfigurations - climate science can be emancipated from its currently constrained anthropocentric paradigm. A geologically and cosmically re-centered understanding awaits to open new frontiers of scientific insight. The magnitude of this philosophical cognitive and perceptual shift should not be underestimated, yet the potential revelations to be unlocked make this pivot as imperative as it is overdue.

References:

References

Keywords:

Keywords