In watching these videos, I found a lot of interesting and surprising information surrounding climate change and the publics’ use and reactions to information on climate change in the interview with Gina McCarthy, which was very interesting to me. What particularly struck me was how she discussed that when using simulations to predict climate changes when there comes time to interact with the public and share this information, the simulations are not commonly explained because people seem to be more focused on asking the big buzz word questions rather than focusing on the substance of the issue. She also discussed a chain of information relaying where the scientists practice the science and test it to ensure that it is accurate; it is then given to people like McCarthy in the field of public health who process the information and makes it relevant to human beings; she translates the scientific information like simulations and models so that the public can more easily understand and digest the information. I had never really thought about this chain of information and that as the information goes from scientists to the public, there is a middle person who is verifying the information/predictions, solidifying the main claims, and boiling down the information to allow for it to be absorbed by as many people as possible. So the actual nitty-gritty science and simulation models don’t usually make it to public knowledge. This is not to say that not all of the information is being shared with the public, but to McCarthy’s point in the video, the public at large is not directly interested in the simulations and intricate science but rather the larger, more simple ideas and questions. One final note is that McCarthy also highlights a shift from the public being concerned about overarching empathy-inducing topics like “saving the polar bears” to a shift in focusing on solutions to things that are readily fixable and matter to the human condition. These ideas from this video were very interesting to me and have made me rethink my own consumption of knowledge and my want to better know and understand the solutions associated with some of the complex topics and predictions surrounding climate change, like predicting the rate of the rise of carbon dioxide trapped in the ozone layer and the rate at which this will present visible adverse effects to humans, for example. This example digs deeper than just the public’s question of how excess carbon dioxide harms humans and the environment? It asks for more information to understand the impacts of uncertainty in climate change science, which I have learned in this class and will apply later on in life.