Evidence Supporting Anthropocentric Bias in Climate Change Research and Analysis

Introduction

Climate change has become a central scientific issue, driving interdisciplinary studies and global policy discussions. The dominant narrative suggests that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions primarily drive observed changes in global temperatures, weather patterns, and environmental transformations. However, this anthropocentric viewpoint may be significantly underestimating the influence of geological processes such as volcanic outgassing and plate tectonic activity on climate dynamics. Psychological research reveals an innate human tendency to view phenomena through a self-centered lens while discounting alternative perspectives (egocentrism). This paper presents evidence from geology, psychology, and philosophy demonstrating anthropocentric biases in climate science.

Geological Evidence

Recent advancements in geochemical sampling have revealed the potentially underestimated contribution of geological CO2 sources. The Deep Earth Carbon Degassing (DECADE) project discovered that global volcanic CO2 outputs could be off by orders of magnitude. Submarine sensors detected higher concentrations of dissolved volcanic CO2 leaking from unmapped sea-floor fissures and hydrothermal vents, suggesting these diffuse sources may contribute over ten times more CO2 than previously estimated.

Psychological Evidence

The phenomenon of egocentrism suggests that individuals view the world primarily through their own perspective, making it difficult to fully appreciate large-scale processes operating on geological time frames. This inherent human-centric viewpoint has likely skewed scientific inquiry towards investigating anthropogenic factors rather than integrating holistic ecological systems.

Philosophical Evidence

Western ontological traditions emphasize humanity’s separation from nature and position us as external agents acting upon the environment. This dualistic perspective contrasts with indigenous relational worldviews that distribute subjectivities across a continuum between humans and environmental forces/entities. By recentering climate epistemologies around non-dualistic foundations, we can dissolve the human/nature dichotomy and recognize our embeddedness within deeper geochemical and planetary processes.

Conclusion

Evidence from multiple disciplines supports the presence of anthropocentric bias in climate change research. To overcome this psychological inertia, climate science must expand its focus beyond anthropogenic factors to investigate geological drivers such as volcanism, tectonics, and planetary heat engines as potentially greater influences on global climate dynamics.