args

Climate Change is caused by Humans

Rules- 1.) No "K's" 2.) Stay on topic 3.) NO TROLLING 4.) Keep it respectable and civil 5.) No new arguments in the last/4th round Failure to follow these rules will result in the automatic loss of my opponent Structure- R1- Acceptance only R2 - Each side provides their claims R3 - Rebuttals R4 - Closing Arguments The burden fo evidence will be shared equally for I have to prove it is caused by humans and Con has to prove it's caused by natural aspects. I would like to thank my opponent in advance for accepting the debate

The political science of climate change

I thank CON for offering his comments this final round. I will do my best to address everything that is relevant, since I have been accused of not doing so. Agenda 21 CON has accused me of not addressing Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is a document prepared by the United Nations which offers suggestions on how do develop in a sustainable fashion [1][2]. It is a non-binding report full of policy suggestions of the type the UN frequently puts out [3][4]. Of course, he is correct. I did not address it because it really doesn’t fit in with any of the resolutions being discussed here. Green Guilt: the IPCC I would like to thank CON for providing some support for his claims. Unfortunately, I find his source lacking. I started to rebut each point on the page CON linked to, but realized that I would quickly be over my character limit. This sort of conspiracy theory website is akin to a Gish Gallop. Even so, it doesn’t matter, because the fact that data and reports are used for political purposes, that there are discussion on how best to present the position of the material, or that contributors to papers are sometimes determined by internal politics, does not mean that the IPCC’s purpose is to mislead people via Green Guilt. Eugenics Again, I would like to thank CON for bringing some sources to bear, even though they are again quite lacking. Recognizing that overpopulation is a real problem [5], and noting that it has an impact on other human caused problems, such as global warming, is not eugenics. Even if there were some nut-jobs proposing things such as CON suggests in the 1970s [6], this does not mean that eugenicists are prevalent today, or that they are in positions of power. Finally, that some wealthy individuals promote responsible parenthood and family planning options is not eugenics. The Elites It seems that CON has dropped the argument that so called “elites” are manipulated into believing that global warming is a real threat. Loose Ends CON has made several claims at the end of his comments that are irrelevant. He has attacked the scientific enterprise, expanded his conspiracy theory about Agenda 21, and even made the case that increases in CO2 may be beneficial. I will not be addressing these because they are not relevant to the resolutions being discussed. Final Thoughts CON made three main arguments in the first round, all of which I have addressed. The burden to demonstrate these resolutions sits with CON, and he has not met his burden, as I have shown. I would like to thank CON for setting up this debate; I don’t generally debate deniers, it has been interesting. Sources: [1] http://www.thedailybeast.com... [2] http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org... [3]http://www.slate.com... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org... [5] http://howmany.org... [6] http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk...