climate change - args.me

979 arguments retrieved in 1.0 ms

PRO

PRO
Substituting 'gov' for 'org' I reached a page which I...
developed countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change

C1. Thank you for the citation. Unfortunately, it led me to a page I have taken a screenshot of and saved to my pictures[1]. Substituting 'gov' for 'org' I reached a page which I then, after one click (the 'evidence sidebare') arrived at a page where NASA agrees that global warming is both happening and is 'very likely human caused'.[2] C2: My apologies to my opponent; I intended to say that the United States is not the only developed country. Thus, for example, my references to Australia. Australia is a developed country. C3: I would like to state that humans are sometimes idiots and have been known, on occasion, to not ban things that were harmful. Examples include literally everything that has ever been banned; logically these thing would have had not to be banned at one point. Secondly, the wording of the resolution assumes that greenhouse gases are hurting the environment; if they weren't no one would have any particular desire to mitigate the effects. My thanks to my opponent for the debate. 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://Substituting 'gov' for 'org' I reached a page which I then, after one click (the 'evidence sidebare') arrived at a page where NASA agrees that global warming is both happening and is 'very likely human caused'.[2] C2: My apologies to my opponent; I intended to say that the United States is not the only developed country. Thus, for example, my references to Australia. Australia is a developed country. C3: I would like to state that humans are sometimes idiots and have been known, on occasion, to not ban things that were harmful. Examples include literally everything that has ever been banned; logically these thing would have had not to be banned at one point. Secondly, the wording of the resolution assumes that greenhouse gases are hurting the environment; if they weren't no one would have any particular desire to mitigate the effects. My thanks to my opponent for the debate. 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://Thus, for example, my references to Australia. Australia is a developed country. C3: I would like to state that humans are sometimes idiots and have been known, on occasion, to not ban things that were harmful. Examples include literally everything that has ever been banned; logically these thing would have had not to be banned at one point. Secondly, the wording of the resolution assumes that greenhouse gases are hurting the environment; if they weren't no one would have any particular desire to mitigate the effects. My thanks to my opponent for the debate. 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://climate.nasa.gov...
- https://www.debate.org/debates/developed-countries-have-a-moral-obligation-to-mitigate-the-effects-of-climate-change/1/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.02
  climate: 7.89
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.11)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.10)
PRO
Due to my oppositions recent two forfeits I have began to...
Developed Countries should have a Moral Obligation to Mitigate the Effects of Climate Change

Due to my oppositions recent two forfeits I have began to come to the conclusion that they do not have any suitable counter-arguements for my contentions.
- https://www.debate.org/debates/Developed-Countries-should-have-a-Moral-Obligation-to-Mitigate-the-Effects-of-Climate-Change/1/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.02
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.10)
PRO
I extend my arguements.
Developed Countries should have a Moral Obligation to Mitigate the Effects of Climate Change

I extend my arguements.
- https://www.debate.org/debates/Developed-Countries-should-have-a-Moral-Obligation-to-Mitigate-the-Effects-of-Climate-Change/1/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.02
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.10)
PRO
Developed must protect developing from higher costs of...
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Developed must protect developing from higher costs of warming
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)
PRO
US is responsible to lead in fighting global warming
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

US is responsible to lead in fighting global warming
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)
PRO
Sectoral emissions standards risk causing protectionism
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Sectoral emissions standards risk causing protectionism
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)
PRO
Sectoral emissions standards constrain developing nations
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Sectoral emissions standards constrain developing nations
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)
PRO
Developed states are responsible set model of "green"...
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Developed states are responsible set model of "green" economies.
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)
PRO
Even with lower obligation, developing states are going...
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Even with lower obligation, developing states are going "green"
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)
PRO
Developing states will not go "green" before developed...
Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Developing states will not go "green" before developed competitors
- http://www.debatepedia.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Developed_countries_have_a_higher_obligation_to_combat_climate_change
- score
  
  BM25 score: 14.01
  climate: 7.88
  conclusion: 6.64 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 1.25 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.09)
  
  change: 6.13
  conclusion: 5.74 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.73)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.09)

CON

CON
The U.S.A. is expansive and diverse, and so is Canada....
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

08/07/18. and no major wars at the moment. The U.S.A. is expansive and diverse, and so is Canada. Both are interesting places to visit. But home is where the heart is and my heart is in the U.K. For you the U.S.A. will always be superior and no one is ever going to The U.S.A. is expansive and diverse, and so is Canada. Both are interesting places to visit. But home is where the heart is and my heart is in the U.K. For you the U.S.A. will always be superior and no one is ever going to change your mind. Happy 8th of July.
- https://www.debate.org/debates/The-USA-IS-Superior-Change-My-Mind/2/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 12.62
  climate: 0.73
  sourceText: 0.73 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 1.22)
  
  sum: 6.59 (product 2.65, product 3.56, product 0.37)
  
  change: 11.89
  conclusion: 7.96 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 1.01)
  
  premises: 3.56 (idf 2.58, tfNorm 1.38)
  
  sourceText: 0.37 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.02)
CON
Therefore Canada is also superior to the U.S.A. ... It...
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

The U.S.A. is superior to what? How is it possible to change a mind? Maybe superiority is the antithesis of reality and maybe Stockholm is the Capital of Sweden and maybe cheese is just to tasty for our own good. The U.SA. certainly isn't superior to a cheese and sweet pickle sandwich or a good quality pork sausage. Wouldn't you agree? Lake Superior is a really great lake, but the Northern half is in Canada. Therefore Canada is also superior to the U.S.A. It stands to reason doesn't it. The Pacific Ocean. Happy 5th of July.
- https://www.debate.org/debates/The-USA-IS-Superior-Change-My-Mind/2/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 12.43
  climate: 0.73
  sourceText: 0.73 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 1.22)
  
  sum: 6.40 (product 2.65, product 3.37, product 0.37)
  
  change: 11.70
  conclusion: 7.96 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 1.01)
  
  premises: 3.37 (idf 2.58, tfNorm 1.31)
  
  sourceText: 0.37 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.02)
CON
I know this sounds like a semantic distinction but it's...
CMV: There is no legal way to bring real change in the USA.

Legal for who? Because there are absolutely legal ways for people in government to bring real change in the USA. Just because they don't make certain needed changes doesn't mean they aren't possible. I know this sounds like a semantic distinction but it's not. You have to keep in mind that there is no universal law saying, for instance, that politicians have to listen to lobbyists. They choose to do so, and they can choose not to. Just because it isn't simple, because it might harm their future prospects, because in reality it would take a while to untangle the repercussions, doesn't mean they can't choose not to. Saying otherwise is defeatism and downplays their responsibility. Following from that, one legal way to bring real change in the USA for someone currently not in government is to run for office. Which by no means is easy or guaranteed or something everyone wants, and when they're in office they can always, again, just not make the change, but it's been very effective for the Tea Partiers/Trump supporters and the changes they wanted.
- https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/l77o8v/cmv_there_is_no_legal_way_to_bring_real_change_in/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 12.22
  climate: 0.68
  sourceText: 0.68 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 1.14)
  
  sum: 6.91 (product 2.32, product 4.20, product 0.39)
  
  change: 11.54
  conclusion: 6.95 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.88)
  
  premises: 4.20 (idf 2.58, tfNorm 1.63)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.11)
CON
Have you travelled the World extensively and made honest,...
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

What are your benchmarks for national superiority? What do you base your study of national superiority upon? Have you travelled the World extensively and made honest, first hand comparisons or do you rely upon edited and manipulated, second hand media information? Maybe you are simply biased. There's nothing wrong with a bit of national pride, but I would suggest that national pride is not an accurate measure of superiority. National pride is similar to religion, it gets lodged inside your head at an early age and is nigh on impossible to shift. So I almost certainly won't be able to change your mind. But that doesn't matter. Happy 6th of July.
- https://www.debate.org/debates/The-USA-IS-Superior-Change-My-Mind/2/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 12.17
  climate: 0.73
  sourceText: 0.73 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 1.22)
  
  sum: 6.14 (product 2.65, product 3.12, product 0.37)
  
  change: 11.45
  conclusion: 7.96 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 1.01)
  
  premises: 3.12 (idf 2.58, tfNorm 1.21)
  
  sourceText: 0.37 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.02)
CON
It is wrong for donors to attempt to change the policies...
Cutting aid could produce a change in policy direction

It is wrong for donors to attempt to change the policies of a sovereign state. Each state has equal rights, which include the right to be free from interference from any other group[1]. The West is therefore violating state sovereignty when they attempt to change domestic policies which they dislike[2]. African governments have a right to self-determination without the interference from the West; they are no longer colonies. [1] Political Realism in International Relations Karpowicz, K 02/04/13 [2] Quandzie,E. Anti-gay aid cut: Bring it on, Ghana tells UK 02/11/11
- https://idebate.org/debatabase/health/sex-sexuality-international-africa-human-rights-gender-minorities/house-would-cut
- score
  
  BM25 score: 12.11
  climate: 0.57
  sourceText: 0.57 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 0.96)
  
  sum: 6.91 (product 2.32, product 4.23, product 0.36)
  
  change: 11.54
  conclusion: 6.95 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.88)
  
  premises: 4.23 (idf 2.58, tfNorm 1.64)
  
  sourceText: 0.36 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 1.95)
CON
I don't want to vote. ... I neither agree or disagree...
I don't vote. Change my mind. :p

I don't want to vote. Change my mind. I neither agree or disagree with voting despite me having the con/against position thing
- https://www.debate.org/debates/I-dont-vote.-Change-my-mind.-p/1/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 12.05
  climate: 0.78
  sourceText: 0.78 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 1.30)
  
  sum: 6.64 (product 2.32, product 3.97, product 0.36)
  
  change: 11.27
  conclusion: 6.95 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.88)
  
  premises: 3.97 (idf 2.58, tfNorm 1.54)
  
  sourceText: 0.36 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 1.93)
CON
That is why the survival of the fittest theory is so...
The Meaning of life is to support life and create change.

You: I see your point about prey not "giving itself up" to its predator" Me: Cool You: but my point is not about animal or human instinct but more or less why there is life and why life has any point; not whether death supports life. Me: This is understandable, but not your assertion which, was that the Meaning of life is to support life. you go on to say, that there wouldn't be life without this support. I countered by with examples, like the ocean, the water (non-living things that support life. I also asked you where death (a very natural part of life) fits in if the whole point of life is to support other life. I think I have stayed very close to the terms of this argument..(without self-inflicting wounds) And yet you continue to impose your value on the meaning of all life (it'd be okay, if it were just your own) by saying things like: You: Therefore, wouldn't the only reason life continues be because in the past living things died (not necessarily giving themselves up) to support future life; as well as different species evolving to support life whether they evolved to adapt to climate or to hunt prey or grow food etc., Me: Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful theory, but it doesn't hold up for things like death, or the extinction of species. Life is equally destructive (unsupportive) as it is creative (supporting). That is why the survival of the fittest theory is so prominent. You: So, what about the "circle" of life? The supposed "Live, die, and your death supports new life?" What about how everyone dies but their death brings more life to other creatures. Me: So what about how fossil turns into petroleum, or diamonds..these things though valuable, do not necessarily nurture life. Your points are compelling, but to go as far as to say that it is the definitive meaning of life, I believe is a step too far. You: These are people who do not care for others and do not respect life. People who have done amazing things to support the human race though, we remember them kindly and instead of being forgotten they are remembered and have had an impact on future life for the better. Leaving their memory with more respect than that of someone who did not aid in supporting life or advancing our species. Me: Oh my gosh.. cruelty marks our memories and our souls, just as much, if not more than kindness... Yes Ghandi, but also Pol Pot.. Yes Isaac Newton... but also Hitler... and so on memories, both good and bad stick with us...and this too, I think is a survival mechanism!!! Thanks for listening
- https://www.debate.org/debates/The-Meaning-of-life-is-to-support-life-and-create-change./1/
- score
  
  BM25 score: 11.99
  climate: 4.66
  premises: 3.73 (idf 4.80, tfNorm 0.78)
  
  sourceText: 0.93 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 1.57)
  
  change: 7.32
  conclusion: 6.95 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.88)
  
  sourceText: 0.37 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.02)
CON
In the 19th Century the developed world had no choice but...
Developed countries must combat climate change while developing countries have more pressing concerns

This makes the flawed assumption that development has to be dirty to lead to meaningful advances in living standards. This is not the case. In the 19th Century the developed world had no choice but to develop in a dirty way as there were no alternative power sources that could provide enough energy. Today there are numerous green energy sources that are every bit as efficient as the coal fired power that was used for the developed world’s industrial revolution. Moreover history has shown that the states that catch up economically do so by leapfrogging the already developed nations by moving in to new industries and not making the mistakes made by those who are already at the top. Thus Germany took a lead in the then new industry of chemicals by the end of the 19th Century[1] and Japan in Electronics during its economic miracle after world war II. Newly industrializing countries should consciously aim to take a lead in new green industries in order to power their development and can therefore avoid the developing the 19th and 20th century industrial base that was once necessary.[2] [1] Mowery, David C., and Nelson, Richard R., Sources of Industrial Leadership Studies of Seven Industries, Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.222, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NUlpdjc6fsMC&dq [2] Cascio, Jamais, ‘Leapfrog 101’, worldchanging.org, 15 December 2004, http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/001743.html
- https://idebate.org/debatabase/environment/house-believes-developed-countries-have-higher-obligation-combat-climate
- score
  
  BM25 score: 11.04
  climate: 6.30
  conclusion: 5.03 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.55)
  
  sourceText: 1.27 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.13)
  
  change: 4.74
  conclusion: 4.35 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.55)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.12)
CON
States have no responsibility to other states
developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change than developing countries

States have no responsibility to other states
- https://idebate.org/debatabase/environment/house-believes-developed-countries-have-higher-obligation-combat-climate
- score
  
  BM25 score: 11.04
  climate: 6.30
  conclusion: 5.03 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.55)
  
  sourceText: 1.27 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.13)
  
  change: 4.74
  conclusion: 4.35 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.55)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.12)
CON
Developing countries have the biggest incentive to reduce...
developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change than developing countries

Developing countries have the biggest incentive to reduce emissions.
- https://idebate.org/debatabase/environment/house-believes-developed-countries-have-higher-obligation-combat-climate
- score
  
  BM25 score: 11.04
  climate: 6.30
  conclusion: 5.03 (boost 1.50, idf 6.06, tfNorm 0.55)
  
  sourceText: 1.27 (boost 0.20, idf 2.98, tfNorm 2.13)
  
  change: 4.74
  conclusion: 4.35 (boost 1.50, idf 5.24, tfNorm 0.55)
  
  sourceText: 0.39 (boost 0.20, idf 0.93, tfNorm 2.12)