Pro vs. con view
Topic space viewClimate Change
I accept. I've argued pro and con for anthropogenic climate change before. I do personally believe in anthropogenic I do personally believe in anthropogenic climate change, so I might do better with this debate(since I actually believe in what I would be arguing) than I did when I argued against Stupidape who was arguing for anthropogenic climate change. Good luck to you.
Climate change
Wait..... so your pro for climate change, or yo agree with it and your now against it? The title says "Climate Change," and your for it and now you changed your mind.
Climate Change
I will argue that climate change is not man made. The pro will argue that climate change is man made. Structure R1: Acceptance R2: Arguments R3: Attack Opponent's Arguments R4: Defend R2 Arguments NO NEW ARGUEMENTS Must use sources in arguments. Also, Stupidape please don't accept this challenge. I want more people to be involved in this debate, not just you.
Climate change
Global Warming (or climate change in the hot way) is the thing. It is a win or lose election debate topic. It is also very contested in the public field (media). The IPCC states that it exists and that it is human induced. State intervention is often motivated by climate change concerns. However there are many scientists, people and companies that contest climate change or human induced climate change. They have interesting arguments. I believe that they are mistaken. I define human global warming as the abnormal and significant increase of mean global temperatures caused (in part) by human activity. I expect to win if i can show that 1 climate change (in the sense of global warming) exists 2 it is caused in a significant degree by human activity I consider that my opponent wins if he/she is able to negate either of the above. I will affirm 3 arguments to sustain my position: science cvasi-consensus, observable events in the world around us, mental experiment. At this moment there is near consensus between scientists that global warming exists and is human induced[1]. The scientific model is quite simple to understand and makes sense. It is clear that the weather is influenced by many factors, and some are more powerful than others. The greenhouse effect is a powerful factor as shown by the super greenhouse effect on Venus. [2] Green house gases have increased at the highest level in the last 650 000 years after the industrial revolution. [3] To bring the scientific argument down to the human level and to avoid an authority argument i will point out that ice caps are already melting, the first drowned polar bears were found, more violent weather is happening etc. What is more, the arctic ice shows an increase in carbon concentration and temperature.[4] The mental experiment part is more complex in the sense that it involves the concept of positive feed-back. The oceans trap carbon while they are cold, when they heat up they release carbon. This a positive feed-back loop and it means that things will only get worse.[5] . Humans have reached a level where they can affect the climate. Acid rains and other city related weather are examples of humans influencing weather. In conclusion, from the scientific, factual and mental experiment arguments I conclude that global warming exists and it is human induced. Looking forward for a good debate. [1] http://www.sciencemag.org... [2] http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu... [3] http://news.mongabay.com... [4] http://www.heatisonline.org... [5] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Climate change
Climate change is a circus!
Climate Change
A study by the biology cabinet shows no relationship between CO2 and temperature [1]. "On this assessment, the evidence points to a current natural climate change which happens sequentially in two main climate periods, icehouse and warmhouse." Another study was found on the Vostok ice cores, which show temperature records going back over 400,000 years. Data from the ice cores reveal an 800 year lag of CO2 behind temperature [2], meaning CO2 changes came AFTER temperature. If climate change was man made, then temperature would lag behind CO2, but the opposite happens, which proves that CO2 cannot influence temperature. The ice cores also show that the temperature rose to about the same level whenever it rose significantly, which shows that it is a constant cycle and not affected by human activities. The same can be said about the CO2 levels. Manipulation and False Activism Pollutes the Climate Change Debate One of the biggest science scandals, Climategate, occurred in 2009. Hackers stole emails from scientists at the East Angelia Climatic Research Unit, and statements from the emails contradict anthropogenic climate change. [3]. "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't... Our observing system is inadequate" [4]. "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." [4]. The government as well as a variety of foundations donate billions of dollars to scientists to prove global warming is man made and to groups that put a megaphone to the global warming agenda. [5] "the U.S. Government spent more than $32.5 billion on climate studies between 1989 and 2009. This doesn't count about $79 billion more spent for related climate change technology research, foreign aid and tax breaks for green energy."- Forbes A report by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works shows a "billionaire's club" that directs funding to leftist environmental activism groups and policy makers, while also getting grants from the government. [5] "Under President Obama, EPA has given more than $27 million in taxpayer-funded grants to major environmental groups. Notably, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense Fund " two key activists groups with significant ties to senior EPA officials " have collected more than $1 million in funding each." Finally, Former Vice President Al Gore made a famous movie called "An Inconvenient Truth" about the theory of man made global warming and its effects. However, there were eleven significant errors in his movie, coming from Gore trying to exaggerate in attempt to scare people into believing his political agenda. So what could be the cause of the global warming? I believe the sun is the one responsible, as correlations between the sun and the Earth's temperature have been found when studying temperature and sun levels from 1880-1980 [11], and 1980-2006 [12]. This could also explain why other planets in our solar system are warming, as all the planets rely on the Sun. But at the end of the day, the warming is NOT caused by CO2. Sources [1]-http://www.biocab.org...... [2]-http://joannenova.com.au...... and also http://cdiac.ornl.gov...... [3]-https://wikileaks.org...... [4]-http://pastebin.com...... (Screen shots of emails)* and also http://www.justfacts.com...... [5]-http://www.nationalreview.com...... http://www.forbes.com...... http://joannenova.com.au... https://www.epw.senate.gov... [6]-http://curious.astro.cornell.edu...... [7]-http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...... [8]-http://news.nationalgeographic.com...... [9]-http://climate.nasa.gov...... [10]-http://environmentalforest.blogspot.com...... [11]-http://www.tmgnow.com...... [12]-http://www.biocab.org...... *The emails were only available from downloading, and taking screen shots of the emails are the easiest way to show the emails.
Climate Change Exists
Climate change clearly does not exist, here are reasons why: (1) Exhaling Carbon Dioxide is no clear threat to our climate, we just breathe it out, our cars do it too (2) It is a conspiracy (3) There are no sources to back your statement up Here are my sources on how "Climate Change" doesn't exist: (1) http://www.globalclimatescam.com... (2) http://www.newsmax.com... (3) https://en.wikipedia.org... These 3 sources tell you that climate change is fake, first one tells you the top 10 reasons why climate change does not exist, the second, facts about this "global warming" hoax; And finally, The third source tells you the entire conspiracy that "Climate Change exists"
Anthropogenic climate change.
R2 Arguments A scientific consensus exists on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. " But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen." [1] Man-made climate change has already claimed human lives and continues to do so. "in a general context where the anthropogenic contribution to climate change is becoming more plausible, led to an excess of 14,947 deaths in France, between August 4 and 18, 2003. The greatest increase in mortality was due to causes directly attributable to heat: dehydration, hyperthermia, heat stroke." [2] "The association between climate change and the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events is now well established. " [3] "The World Health Organisation estimates that the warming and precipitation trends due to anthropogenic climate change of the past 30 years already claim over 150,000 lives annually. Many prevalent human diseases are linked to climate fluctuations, from cardiovascular mortality and respiratory illnesses due to heatwaves, to altered transmission of infectious diseases and malnutrition from crop failures." [4] "The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90%–100% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent studies by co-authors of this paper. Those results are consistent with the 97% consensus reported by Cook et al " [5] My argument is succinct and should prove that man-made climate change is extremely likely to exist. Thanks for debating. Sources: 1. http://science.sciencemag.org... 2. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... 3. http://dx.doi.org... 4. http://www.nature.com... 5. http://iopscience.iop.org...
Anthropogenic global climate change.
R2 Arguments A scientific consensus exists on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. " But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen." [1] Man-made climate change has already claimed human lives and continues to do so. "in a general context where the anthropogenic contribution to climate change is becoming more plausible, led to an excess of 14,947 deaths in France, between August 4 and 18, 2003. The greatest increase in mortality was due to causes directly attributable to heat: dehydration, hyperthermia, heat stroke." [2] "The association between climate change and the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events is now well established. " [3] "The World Health Organisation estimates that the warming and precipitation trends due to anthropogenic climate change of the past 30 years already claim over 150,000 lives annually. Many prevalent human diseases are linked to climate fluctuations, from cardiovascular mortality and respiratory illnesses due to heatwaves, to altered transmission of infectious diseases and malnutrition from crop failures." [4] "The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90%–100% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent studies by co-authors of this paper. Those results are consistent with the 97% consensus reported by Cook et al " [5] My argument is succinct and should prove that man-made climate change is extremely likely to exist. I will go a step further and explain why if there is so much scientific certainty,yet there is so much political uncertainty. This blame can be placed on the climate change denial movement funded by the fossil fuel industry. "These organizations play a key role in the fossil fuel industry's "disinformation playbook," a strategy designed to confuse the public about global warming and delay action on climate change. Why? Because the fossil fuel industry wants to sell more coal, oil, and gas— even though the science clearly shows that the resulting carbon emissions threaten our planet." [6] "The fossil fuel industry risks losing $33 trillion in revenue over the next 25 years as global warming may drive companies to leave oil, natural gas and coal in the ground, according to a Barclays Plc energy analyst. Government regulations and other efforts to cut carbon emissions will inevitably slash demand for fossil fuels, jeopardizing traditional energy producers, Mark Lewis, Barclays’s head of European utilities equity research, said Monday during a panel discussion in New York on financial risks from climate change. His comments are part of a growing chorus calling for more transparency from oil and gas companies about how their balance sheets may be affected by the global shift away from fossil fuels. As governments adopt stricter environmental policies, there’s increasing risk that companies’ untapped deposits of oil, gas and coal may go unused, turning valuable reserves into stranded assets of questionable value. “There will be lower demand for fossil fuels in the future, and by definition that means lower prices” Lewis said." [7] "The Koch Brothers have sent at least $88,810,770 directly to 80 groups denying climate change science since 1997." [8] "Fossil fuel firms are still bankrolling climate denial lobby groups " [9] "One of the world’s most prominent climate researchers publishing scientific papers that doubt humanity’s role in climate change has received at least $1.2 million from the fossil fuel industry to fund his research and salary, according to documents revealed this weekend. Wei-Hock Soon (known mainly as “Willie”) is aerospace engineer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and has written papers on how the sun’s role in the Earth’s climate outshines the warming impact of humans burning fossil fuels." [10] "Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat, represents Rhode Island in the Senate. Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution. Their activities are often compared to those of Big Tobacco denying the health dangers of smoking. Big Tobacco’s denial scheme was ultimately found by a federal judge to have amounted to a racketeering enterprise." [11] "Right now, we have an energy policy that is rigged to boost the profits of big oil companies like Exxon, BP, and Shell at the expense of average Americans. CEO’s are raking in record profits while climate change ravages our planet and our people — all because the wealthiest industry in the history of our planet has bribed politicians into complacency in the face of climate change. Enough is enough. It’s time for a political revolution that takes on the fossil fuel billionaires, accelerates our transition to clean energy, and finally puts people before the profits of polluters. — Senator Bernie Sanders" [12] The fossil fuel industry is a racketeering enterprise and must answer for their crimes. Fine the climate change deniers and/or jail them, the planet is at stake. Climate change will come down hardest on the poor. Sources: 1. http://science.sciencemag.org... 2. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... 3. http://dx.doi.org... 4. http://www.nature.com... 5. http://iopscience.iop.org... 6. http://www.ucsusa.org... 7. https://www.bloomberg.com... 8. http://www.greenpeace.org... 9. https://www.theguardian.com... 10. https://thinkprogress.org... 11. https://www.washingtonpost.com... 12. https://berniesanders.com...
Anthropogenic climate change.
A scientific consensus exists on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. " But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen." [0] Man-made climate change has already claimed human lives and continues to do so. "in a general context where the anthropogenic contribution to climate change is becoming more plausible, led to an excess of 14,947 deaths in France, between August 4 and 18, 2003. The greatest increase in mortality was due to causes directly attributable to heat: dehydration, hyperthermia, heat stroke." [1] "The association between climate change and the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events is now well established. " [2] "The World Health Organisation estimates that the warming and precipitation trends due to anthropogenic climate change of the past 30 years already claim over 150,000 lives annually. Many prevalent human diseases are linked to climate fluctuations, from cardiovascular mortality and respiratory illnesses due to heatwaves, to altered transmission of infectious diseases and malnutrition from crop failures." [3] "The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90%–100% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent studies by co-authors of this paper. Those results are consistent with the 97% consensus reported by Cook et al " [4] My argument is succinct and should prove that man-made climate change is extremely likely to exist. Thanks for debating. Sources: 0. http://science.sciencemag.org... 1. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... 2. http://dx.doi.org... 3. http://www.nature.com... 4. http://iopscience.iop.org...
Debate.org