Anthropogenic climate change and increased CO2 levels are beneficial to humans and
plant life
I thank my opponent for accepting the debate. And yes, you can use round 1 for whatever
you wanted. Just one round needed to be without argument. Since you chose round 1
to be the round without argument, you can use all of the rest of the rounds for argument.
Now then... Global photosynthesis is on the rise and so is world plant growth Research
suggests that since the industrial revolution when CO2 emissions from human activity
started, plants have been enjoying greatly increased usage of photosynthesis for the
past century and a half, leading to tremendous plant growth worldwide[1][2][3]. As
anyone who has taken a basic biology class knows, plants need CO2 to survive, and
plants have been thriving thanks to the increased CO2 levels. Yes, there are some
negatives to global climate change, but for plants, it's pretty much only positive.
The current concentration of CO2 is perfect for plants, and even a slight increase
would still be okay Plants need an atmospheric concentration of CO2 to be betwen 300-500
parts per million[4], the current concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere which just
recently reached this level, is 400 parts per million[5]. Prior to human influences
on the atmospheric concentration of CO2, we did not have this much, and 400 ppm is
the ideal average of CO2 plants need. If we were to drastically decrease anthropogenic CO2 emissions, this could lead to
a drop in the overall concentration of CO 2 in the atmosphere, and thus this could
be detrimental to the plant life on earth if the drop was significant. As can be seen here, Earth has had an overall history of CO2 declining
in concentration through the millions of years of earth[6]. If humans didn't emit
CO2 through the industrial revolution, and it never happened, since atmospheric CO2
concentrations were declining throughout our history, it could have been very possible
that plant life would all die on earth in the future. In a way, human CO2 activity
is saving our plants. Basically, since we are currently at 400 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere,
we should try to maintain this, and I worry that many environmentalists' actions would
end up bringing the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere down. Because CO2 emissiosn
are beneficial to plant life, it helps entire ecosystems Since plant life is on the
rise, this leads to more food for animals, and more animals can thus thrive. With
more animals thriving, and more plants thriving, this leads to more food for humanity,
so benefiting plants benefits humanity. More people die from cold weather than hot
weather The cold kills 20 times more people throughout the world than hot weather
does.[7] If anything, this is evidence that the earth is too cold and needs warming.
Additionally, many geographers I hear believe we are still in an "ice age" because
the earth is not supposed to have any ice on it, yet we do have ice in Greenland and
antarctica as well as in mountains in various areas.[8] So, basically, I conclude
that if the earth were warmer, we would have fewer human deaths, and this would be
beneficial to humanity. Addressing common problems with global warming: 1) Oceans
will rise Now, I know many people are concerned with the ocean rising due to global
warming and some would argue this is a bad thing. I don't think it really is that
big of a problem, however. The oceans are not rising suddenly, and it would be over
a long period of time that it happens. People will have plenty of time to move out
of areas that are going to be flooded with water from the ocean rising. I argue that
the benefit global warming gives us: where we would have fewer deaths from weather,
is worth having a small percentage of humanity moving somewhere else. 2) Acidity of
the ocean going up I know some people will also be concerned with the acidity of the
ocean going up. This is a problem, but if evolution tells us anything, it's that sea
life will likely be able to adapt to this, as long as the change in acidity of the ocean is not too quick. We can try to lower our emissions if it's
the case that the ocean's acidity is rising too much. I honestly don't know too much
about this particular subject, so I don't know if scientists consider the ocean's
acidity to be rising too fast for marine life to survive, but maybe my opponent can
shed some light on this. If it's the case that it is, keep in mind that I'm not necessarily
saying we should keep the current rate at which we cause global warming, but just
that global warming in general is beneficial to humans and plants. Even if a little
global warming is beneficial, that is fine, and I'm sure the marine life will be able
to survive slight changes in the acidity of the ocean. 3) Deaths from heat-related
illnesses will rise This is true, but since there are many more deaths by cold(see
above), those deaths would likely go down at a faster rate than the deaths from heat
will go up, so over all, I believe more people will be saved from global warming than
if we didn't have it. I believe I have sufficiently argued my case, and I rest my
case. Sources: [1] http://www.ucmerced.edu... [2] http://www.nature.com... [3] http://www.climatecentral.org...
[4] https://fifthseasongardening.com... [5] https://climate.nasa.gov... [6] https://socratic.org... [7] https://www.sciencedaily.com... [8] https://www.sciencedaily.com...
Pro vs. con view
Topic space view
