In Anti-smoking tactics might help us fight climate change written by Simon Dalby, the question of whether warnings should be put on cars or not is posed. As the life-threatening issue of climate change worsens, more and more evidence is proving climate change is changing our lives-and not for the better. Diseases are spreading faster, world hunger and malnutrition is more prominent, farmers can’t grow their crops, and allergy season are getting longer. Because of all of the health issues caused by climate change, some are asking if climate change should be considered a health problem instead of an environmental one. They think that advertising tactics like the ones used for anti-smoking can be effective in preventing climate change. This is because cars, one of the main sources of the pollution that causes climate change, are seen as a necessity instead of planet-killing machines. This mentality is similar to the one previously had for cigarettes- something sophisticated and mature is actually deadly. Cigarette companies are required by most countries to give health warnings, and some have gone so far to show graphic images of smokers in their current condition. If climate change will do even more damage than smoking, shouldn’t cars carry at least the same warnings? Some suggest putting images of natural disaster put on gas and diesel powered cars. The harder thing to do will be crushing the public image of cars of symbols of independence and social status. I chose this article because my grandparents died because they smoked, and it is interesting to think about how negative advertising could help save the world. This article relates science because the advertising industry relies on psychology to exploit human’s natural weaknesses. This information can be beneficial because this type of advertising could help change the way the world thinks about cars, and possibly extend the life of the earth. That gives humans and all other creatures more time to find a way so we all don’t die.