args

The world should focus on climate change than on global economy!

Thank you bruce:you mentioned that six of the 17 countries that use the euro currency are in recession and the U.s economy is struggling again.on the above round i mentioned that things such as droughts or global warming leads to recession.did you look on the cause of that recession before you mention that? Sixty nine percent of homes built in last three years are still unsold;we can not be suprised because where there is no employment there is no money.go back and look on the primary sector of that country.the Greece's GDP is 16% below the pre-crisis peak.wow that is good you.GDP generally is defined as the market value of the goods and services produced by a country.one can ask him self that why one country can produce more products than the other country.i wonder why did Greece obtain such a less percent of GDP.it means that the primary sector of that country is not doing well.when we look such many things are manufactured from farming.the problem may be with the land nor the farmers.the Philippines is one of the countries that suffer the most from extreme weather events which exact a high death toll and economic losses.analyzing data from 1991 to 2010,germanwatch,a climate and development organization,said the Philippines ranked 10th among countries when it comes to exposure and responding to severe weather caused by climate change.all the countries identified to be the most affected in the past two decades were developing countries ,the study noted.aside from the philippines,there were Bangladesh,Burma,Honduras,Nicaragua,Haiti,Vietman,the Dominican republic,Pakhstan and north korea.what about these identified countries? Does that not show us that those countries are not focusing on climate change?when can one look at the status of the economy of these countries you wil find that they are at poor condition.this year's analysis underline that less developed countries are generally more affected than industrialized countries,according to the climate risk index.with regard to future climate ,the climate risk index can serve as a warning signal indicating past vulnerability which may further increase in regions where extreme events will become more frequent or more severe through climate change.

The climate is not "a changing".

The climate is not changing. The local weather may change but the global climate stays basically the same. The oceans are not rising either. The IPCC is a communist organisation which has communist agendas. You can't and shouldn't trust any person or scientist who tells you that the climate is changing. This person will most likely have a secret agenda which has nothing to do with climate.

Climate Shift

What a rude and poorly thought response. Please, do not insult me when I am seeking only an intellectual debate. Framework If con did not like the framework of the debate (which is a fairly standard format) then they should not have accepted the debate. Con does not understand what, in debate, a resolution is. If I may offer some info to con, a resolution is a statement that the Pro side must argue in agreement with, and the Con side must argue in disagreement with. The resolution contends three cases. Climate shift is real; Climate shift is influenced by man; Climate shift ought to be a legitimate concern of those who care about the future of humanity. As it is apparent that my opponent has put no real thought forward as to what this means, I'll attempt to shed light into the dark deep abyssal grotto of ignorance that is the argument of my opponent. For the pro to win this debate, Pro must tender a compelling argument that every case presented by the resolution is agreeable with. The first point regards the reality of climate shift or global warming (which is a common point of debate). The second point regards the cause of climate shift, if it is indeed real. The final point regards the impact of climate shift (again, if it is indeed real). If my opponent is confused as to what climate shift is, then I shall provide a definition. This debate regards climate shift or what is more colloquially referred to as Global warming. "the rise in the average temperature of Earth's atmosphere and oceans since the late 19th century and its projected continuation."(1) The framework is the structure of the debate. The rules. It is always relevent. Pro's Case My entire argument is almost totally unrebutted. Con only makes a weak attempt to discredit a single point. Overall, a weak argument made by the Con that consists primarly of aggressive rantlike points that all lack proper substantiation. Cons argument also fails to meet the BOP. Conduct ought to be awarded to pro for cons flagrant disregard for the rules of the debate. As con failed to cite any sources but one, sources ought to be awarded to pro as well. Arguments are up to the judges, but I would remind that judges that almost my entire argument is unrebutted, and, according to the framework of the debate, any new arguments or rebuttals that the con may try to make in the final round are to be disregarded completely. VOTE PRO! 1.http://en.wikipedia.org...