args

Climate change is real and caused by humans

Okay first off, you keep saying climate change is real. IT IS! the climate changes constantly according to the season. We are arguing that that GLOBAL WARMING isn't real. All you are doing is rebutting my arguments saying that they are not caused by humans, so in saying, your saying I'm correct. You have made no arguments suggesting that humans cause global warming, because there is none. All you have said is that most Scientist agree with global warming and that they believe that humans are a main cause of it, but yet where is the evidence. I can't find anything to rebut so let me make more arguments. Some of the cause is in the arctic; the polar ice caps are melting faster than it can be evaporated .This process may be reversed in 10-20 years. Humans are only responsible for less than 3 % of all the carbon dioxide (greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere. Geologists Nicholas Chackleton and Neil Opdyke both from Cambridge University wrote in a quaternary research journal. Estimating the average world temperature has been slowly increasing over the last one million years, long before the human industries started releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. People think Carbon dioxide sent in to the atmosphere today will affect people hundreds of years later. But the truth is Carbon Dioxide has a life span of 20 years. After 20 years, it disappears from the atmosphere all together. The sun actually has little to do with actually heating the atmosphere with its high frequency radiation. Something as hot as the sun can"t give off low frequency radiation called infrared. Instead, the sun"s rays heats the Earth"s surface, this weakens the radiation to infrared. From there it moves in to the earth"s atmosphere by any means necessary (Conduction, convection, evaporation). Then the inferred radiation is absorbed by the CO2. Ninety seven percent of the heat in the atmosphere gets there either through convection or evaporation, and not greenhouse gasses. The climate now days have made minimal changes compared to the dinosaur ages. Water evaporation is a bigger cause of global warming than carbon dioxide by at least 100 times. The earth has been here for more than 4 billion years. The human industry has only been around for around 200 years. The earth has been warming since the dinosaur ages. Without a doubt, humans have caused minimal changes to our environment as it is already warming itself. Nature is sending Carbon dioxide in to out atmosphere by natural disasters. For example, the eruption of Mt. St Helens has sent more carbon dioxide in to the atmosphere than humans have for over decades. In fact, that eruption actually caused global cooling of 1 degree. According to scientific researcher Tim Ball, who has received a PhD from Cambridge University, the earth goes through a natural Climate cycle. In 1940-1980, the earth was actually facing global cooling. In 1980-2020, the earth"s temperature should be reversing, and gradually start warming naturally. This is my opinion, the earth used to have frozen rivers, and frozen mountains, but since humans came to live, more and more carbon dioxide has been inserted in to the atmosphere. It is not because of Burning fossil fuels, but because humans breathe. It"s not our fault we breathe, it"s completely natural. Humans must breathe to survive. For example, more and more babies are born everyday; they all breathe and release Carbon Dioxide in to the atmosphere. Human input to the greenhouse gasses are as much as 1% more per year more than last year"s average. If 1% is that great of a difference, then all like on earth would have been destroyed long ago. So how could humans cause global warming if global warming was around before humans even existed? Sources: http://scienceray.com...

Developed countries have to support developing countries in the fight for climate change.

Hello, I'm glad to meet you. I hope this debate goes well. I represent those who are against this motion. First, why should developed countries NOT have the obligation to help these under-developed countries in the first place? The world itself is fighting climate change and every country has contributed to climate change at one point or another and it's every country's obligation to help prevent since it is affecting everyone. Most third world countries like Somalia, Maldives, Bangladesh, etc. fought tooth and nail with the help of other countries and the UN and there is not a lot of progress and they end up depending on other countries. Second, why do undeveloped countries need or depend on the help of developed countries and the UN? It is because of their economic vulnerability. Climate change will hit underdeveloped countries the most because of their economic vulnerability. And this is what makes these countries dependant on foreign aid since they can't afford it themselves which leads to lack of funding on better alternatives and better technology. Third, why can't developed countries help these under-developed countries when they themselves are in a better position? It is because more developed have bigger problems to deal with. Take a look at the US, they are considerably developed and have far more better technology to help their It is because of their economic vulnerability. Climate change will hit underdeveloped countries the most because of their economic vulnerability. And this is what makes these countries dependant on foreign aid since they can't afford it themselves which leads to lack of funding on better alternatives and better technology. Third, why can't developed countries help these under-developed countries when they themselves are in a better position? It is because more developed have bigger problems to deal with. Take a look at the US, they are considerably developed and have far more better technology to help their climate change crisis. Then why don't help on a bigger scale? It's like what I said, the more developed you are, the more likely your problems are bigger. This is what I currently have on my mind as I write this. I hope you can debate with me. Cheers.

Resolved: Developed countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change.

For the purpose of this debate I propose the following definitions. Developed countries is a term used to identify the wealthiest nations in the world, which include Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. (ww Norton & co. economics textbook) Moral obligation is a duty arising out of considerations of right and wrong (Princeton University) For our framework, we will be using utilitarianism, which is that actions should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons. Specifically, according to utilitarian philosphers Peter Singer and Henry Sidgwick, "there are moral assertions that we recognise intuitively as true... suffering is intrinsically bad, and... people's preferences should be satisfied." To the topic, this means that mitigting the effects of climate change is neccessary for providing the greatest happiness to the most people. Contention 1: Developed countries are largely responsible for climate change It is common truth that industrialized nations bear more responsibility for human-induced climate change. This is because over the years, dating back to the Industrial revolution, humans have been producing greenhouse gases that have influenced Earth's atmosphere. As such it would be unfair to ask developing countries to act similarly as developed countries. "When the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was formulated ... the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities was acknowledged. ... [T]his principle recognized that "The largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries; "Per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low; "The share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs."(The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) As a result, Today's developed nations are responsible for global warming and the effects of which we see today. And it is unfair to expect undeveloped world to make the same emissions reductions. Contention 2: Developed countries are the only ones with the capabilities to act on climate change No only do developed nation have the most to cut per capita, but they are also the only ones that have the technological advancements and resources to combat climate change. As such they have an obligation to use these resources to fix their planet. More importantly, the developed countries have the research capabilities to create the technology to make a green self-sustaining economy. For example, Italy for the first time has been able to utilize solar power to produce more electricity than wind power, thus accounting for nearly 3.2% of their total energy needs. In addition, by being at the forefront of this technology, Italy, a country constantly on the brink of economic disaster, has been able to become more stabilized and focus its energy on expanding its renewable energy market.(renewable energy world) Further, the developed world has the finance and expertise to develop these projects and implement and manage them all around the world. As the nations with the greatest capability, the developed world has the increased responsibility to act for the betterment of all. Contention 3: The greatest impact will come when the largest emitters of greenhouse gases make reductions. Developed countries emit the most greenhouse gases per capita, in 2008 the US emitted 17.9 tonnes compared to China's 5.3 tons per person. If reductions are made in such nations, then we will see a much bigger impact in the climate than if it came from developing nations. In addition, the developed countries with high CO2 emissions can reduce output through lifestyle changes. For example, biking to work instead of taking the car or cutting back on the junk food now and then. For developing nations, changes like that can not be made. They would have to change their entire economy and route to development to meat such needs even though they don't produce all that much in the first place. In the future, these developing nations will look to the actions of the developed world to plan for their future. By combating climate change, we ensure that everyone will eventually reach a point in which we can eliminate emissions all together. In Conclusion Global warming is an outcome of human activities rather than a natural disaster. Without maximum action from the developed world, all countries will be ultimately affected, including the rich countries.

Factory Farming is the #1 cause of man-made global climate change

Kind regards for this debate. I will be representing the Con side, meaning that I will be debating that Factory Farming is not the number 1 cause of man made climate change. First I would like to define 'factory farming', being defined as "a system of rearing livestock using highly intensive methods, by which poultry, pigs, or cattle are confined indoors under strictly controlled conditions." 'Man made' implies that "made or caused by human beings (as opposed to occurring or being made naturally)." This means that the burning of fossil fuels, while it could occur naturally, occurs 'man made' as the method by which fossil fuels are creating climate change and are by all means man made, as to say that a majority of emissions would not occur, was it not for the human action of burning fossil fuels, thus implying a man made action and resulting in man made climate change. Opening Statement: First I would like to refer to to the World Resources Institute's data (http://www.wri.org...) showing that the US is one of the highest contributors to emissions. That being said, I will provide the following graph easily showing the little impact farming, not to mention this includes all practices of farming, not just 'factory farming', has on the overall emissions. This graph is provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. (http://www3.epa.gov...) Easy to see, Agriculture has a minimal input of 9% on Greenhouse Gas emissions. Furthermore it is to mention, that according to the source used above, methane, the gas produced by animals, may make up an estimated 30% of emmissions in the Agricultural sector, however, thus only around 3% overall. And this is not even factory farming, just animals in total. Conclusion: As provided by statistics above, Agriculture itself is not even a major contribution to Greenhouse gas emissions, meaning that factory farming, which is an even smaller contributor, is not the number one cause of man made global climate change. Kind Regards, I am looking forward to your arguments.

Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

China is worst contributor to climate change; has equal obligations

Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

Large developing nations are wealthy enough to lead on climate change.

Developed countries have a higher obligation to combat climate change

"Blame game" distracts from solving global climate change