This is like comparing a incandescent light bulb to a CFL...
Anthropogenic global climate change.
Round four defense Outline. I. Scientific consensus. II. Co2 is unsaturated. III. Co2 increases heat thus evaporation. IV. Temperature is increasing. V. Science is a skeptic's viewpoint. VI. Sources I. Scientific consensus. Fact: The scientific consensus used very high standards including being based upon a consilience of evidence, social calibration, and social diversity. The climate scientists' findings were published in scholarly peer reviewed journals. Myth 1: The scientific consensus is an ad populum fallacy. Fallacy 1: The fallacy is the fallacy fallacy. People misuse fallacies all the time. Just because you say something, doesn't make it true. Wouldn't it be cool if you said "I am a millionaire" and it came true? "Scientific consensus What's the difference between most people believe X and scientific consensus which is, at the end of the day, most scientists believe X? Doesn't this make out scientists to be somehow superior to the rest of the population? There are two significant differences: Scientific consensus doesn't claim to be true, it claims to be our best understanding currently held by those who study the matter. Scientific claims for truth are always tentative rather than final, even if they are often very impressive tentative claims for truth. Scientific consensus is built upon a foundation of logic and systematic evidence - the scientific method - rather than popular prejudice. The consensus comes not from blindly agreeing with those in authority, but from having their claims to be thoroughly reviewed and criticised by their peers. (Note that even long-established scientific consensus can be overthrown by better logic and better evidence typically preceded by anomalous research findings.) " [17] Myth 2: The scientific consensus is groupthink. Fallacy 2: Misrepresentation, comparing past scientific consensus to present fails to take into account that today's standards are more robust than standards decades ago. This is like comparing a incandescent light bulb to a CFL (compact fluoride lamp) light bulb and claiming, the incandescent light bulb is an energy hog, therefore the CFL is an energy hog too. This is also jumping to conclusions. II. Co2 is unsaturated. Fact: Co2 is nowhere near saturation point. Co2 has been much higher in the past with much higher temperatures. Venus has much higher Co2 and has much higher temperatures. Myth: Co2 is saturated. Fallacy: Oversimplification. The height of which heat is escaping is rising. Meaning more heat is getting trapped in the lower atmosphere. Focusing solely on the air temperature absorption is missing the bigger picture that more air is getting warmed. The amount of heat escaping to space is decreasing. Think of your house, you can increase the heat by turning up the furnace or by better insulating your house. [18] Picture here: III. Co2 increases heat thus evaporation. Fact: Co2 increase greenhouse warming. More heat means higher evaporation rates due to molecules breaking surface tension easier when excited. Myth: There evaporation rate has not increased therefore heat has not increased. Fallacy: Cherry picking most likely. My opponent does not tell how he/she got the graph in figure three. Is this worldwide or over a single location? Some areas will become wetter while others drier due to changes in the climate. Since the vast majority of the Earth is Ocean, it is safe to say evaporation rates have increased. Again, my opponent's argument and graph is too vague for me to fully address. Another possibility is my opponent is measuring the ocean's height. In that case water that is warmer expands. My opponent is asking me to stab in the dark because he/she failed to make a clear argument. IV. Temperature is increasing. Fact: Temperature increasing is a well established fact. From direct measurements including weather stations to indirect measurements including Co2 rising, sea level rise, more heat waves and more intense heat waves, less hurricanes but stronger hurricanes, higher humidity, and many more indicators. Myth: Temperature is not increasing. Fallacy: Misrepresentation. First, figure 4 provides supporting evidence for my side of the debate. The overall trend is upwards. The problem with raw data without a trend line is it is difficult to detect the overall upwards trend in temperature. As anyone can see in figure 4 the highest temperature is past 2010. V. Science is a skeptic's viewpoint. Fact: Science is a skeptical point of view. Skepticism is the reason why there is the scientific method and peer review journals. Science is the polar opposite of blind faith. This is calling black white instead of black. Myth: Science is blind faith. Fallacy: Appeal to emotion fallacy comparing science to religion. The idea is to give the audience a cheap jolt and hope they remember the myth. VI. Sources 17. http://rationalwiki.org... 18. https://skepticalscience.com...