args

Anthropogenic climate change and increased CO2 levels are beneficial to humans and plant life

I thank my opponent for accepting the debate. And yes, you can use round 1 for whatever you wanted. Just one round needed to be without argument. Since you chose round 1 to be the round without argument, you can use all of the rest of the rounds for argument. Now then... Global photosynthesis is on the rise and so is world plant growth Research suggests that since the industrial revolution when CO2 emissions from human activity started, plants have been enjoying greatly increased usage of photosynthesis for the past century and a half, leading to tremendous plant growth worldwide[1][2][3]. As anyone who has taken a basic biology class knows, plants need CO2 to survive, and plants have been thriving thanks to the increased CO2 levels. Yes, there are some negatives to global climate change, but for plants, it's pretty much only positive. The current concentration of CO2 is perfect for plants, and even a slight increase would still be okay Plants need an atmospheric concentration of CO2 to be betwen 300-500 parts per million[4], the current concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere which just recently reached this level, is 400 parts per million[5]. Prior to human influences on the atmospheric concentration of CO2, we did not have this much, and 400 ppm is the ideal average of CO2 plants need. If we were to drastically decrease anthropogenic CO2 emissions, this could lead to a drop in the overall concentration of CO 2 in the atmosphere, and thus this could be detrimental to the plant life on earth if the drop was significant. As can be seen here, Earth has had an overall history of CO2 declining in concentration through the millions of years of earth[6]. If humans didn't emit CO2 through the industrial revolution, and it never happened, since atmospheric CO2 concentrations were declining throughout our history, it could have been very possible that plant life would all die on earth in the future. In a way, human CO2 activity is saving our plants. Basically, since we are currently at 400 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere, we should try to maintain this, and I worry that many environmentalists' actions would end up bringing the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere down. Because CO2 emissiosn are beneficial to plant life, it helps entire ecosystems Since plant life is on the rise, this leads to more food for animals, and more animals can thus thrive. With more animals thriving, and more plants thriving, this leads to more food for humanity, so benefiting plants benefits humanity. More people die from cold weather than hot weather The cold kills 20 times more people throughout the world than hot weather does.[7] If anything, this is evidence that the earth is too cold and needs warming. Additionally, many geographers I hear believe we are still in an "ice age" because the earth is not supposed to have any ice on it, yet we do have ice in Greenland and antarctica as well as in mountains in various areas.[8] So, basically, I conclude that if the earth were warmer, we would have fewer human deaths, and this would be beneficial to humanity. Addressing common problems with global warming: 1) Oceans will rise Now, I know many people are concerned with the ocean rising due to global warming and some would argue this is a bad thing. I don't think it really is that big of a problem, however. The oceans are not rising suddenly, and it would be over a long period of time that it happens. People will have plenty of time to move out of areas that are going to be flooded with water from the ocean rising. I argue that the benefit global warming gives us: where we would have fewer deaths from weather, is worth having a small percentage of humanity moving somewhere else. 2) Acidity of the ocean going up I know some people will also be concerned with the acidity of the ocean going up. This is a problem, but if evolution tells us anything, it's that sea life will likely be able to adapt to this, as long as the change in acidity of the ocean is not too quick. We can try to lower our emissions if it's the case that the ocean's acidity is rising too much. I honestly don't know too much about this particular subject, so I don't know if scientists consider the ocean's acidity to be rising too fast for marine life to survive, but maybe my opponent can shed some light on this. If it's the case that it is, keep in mind that I'm not necessarily saying we should keep the current rate at which we cause global warming, but just that global warming in general is beneficial to humans and plants. Even if a little global warming is beneficial, that is fine, and I'm sure the marine life will be able to survive slight changes in the acidity of the ocean. 3) Deaths from heat-related illnesses will rise This is true, but since there are many more deaths by cold(see above), those deaths would likely go down at a faster rate than the deaths from heat will go up, so over all, I believe more people will be saved from global warming than if we didn't have it. I believe I have sufficiently argued my case, and I rest my case. Sources: [1] http://www.ucmerced.edu... [2] http://www.nature.com... [3] http://www.climatecentral.org... [4] https://fifthseasongardening.com... [5] https://climate.nasa.gov... [6] https://socratic.org... [7] https://www.sciencedaily.com... [8] https://www.sciencedaily.com...