args

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

I accept.

Nations should work to prepare for climate change instead of preventing it.

Please don't forfeit. I spent some time on this. I beg you Mark234532123456787654. Man up and fight. Cheers.

Nations should work to prepare for climate change instead of preventing it.

Well this was kind of fun.

developed countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change

C1. Thank you for the citation. Unfortunately, it led me to a page I have taken a screenshot of and saved to my pictures[1]. Substituting 'gov' for 'org' I reached a page which I then, after one click (the 'evidence sidebare') arrived at a page where NASA agrees that global warming is both happening and is 'very likely human caused'.[2] C2: My apologies to my opponent; I intended to say that the United States is not the only developed country. Thus, for example, my references to Australia. Australia is a developed country. C3: I would like to state that humans are sometimes idiots and have been known, on occasion, to not ban things that were harmful. Examples include literally everything that has ever been banned; logically these thing would have had not to be banned at one point. Secondly, the wording of the resolution assumes that greenhouse gases are hurting the environment; if they weren't no one would have any particular desire to mitigate the effects. My thanks to my opponent for the debate. 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://Substituting 'gov' for 'org' I reached a page which I then, after one click (the 'evidence sidebare') arrived at a page where NASA agrees that global warming is both happening and is 'very likely human caused'.[2] C2: My apologies to my opponent; I intended to say that the United States is not the only developed country. Thus, for example, my references to Australia. Australia is a developed country. C3: I would like to state that humans are sometimes idiots and have been known, on occasion, to not ban things that were harmful. Examples include literally everything that has ever been banned; logically these thing would have had not to be banned at one point. Secondly, the wording of the resolution assumes that greenhouse gases are hurting the environment; if they weren't no one would have any particular desire to mitigate the effects. My thanks to my opponent for the debate. 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://Thus, for example, my references to Australia. Australia is a developed country. C3: I would like to state that humans are sometimes idiots and have been known, on occasion, to not ban things that were harmful. Examples include literally everything that has ever been banned; logically these thing would have had not to be banned at one point. Secondly, the wording of the resolution assumes that greenhouse gases are hurting the environment; if they weren't no one would have any particular desire to mitigate the effects. My thanks to my opponent for the debate. 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://climate.nasa.gov...

Developed Countries should have a Moral Obligation to Mitigate the Effects of Climate Change

Due to my oppositions recent two forfeits I have began to come to the conclusion that they do not have any suitable counter-arguements for my contentions.

Developed Countries should have a Moral Obligation to Mitigate the Effects of Climate Change

I extend my arguements.

Ruining the Harvard-Yale football game is no way to fix climate change

OPINION Activists decided it would be a good idea to delay one of the most notable NCAA Football Championship Subdivision football games of the year to make a political statement. The Yale Bulldogs hosted the Harvard Crimson on Saturday and beat them 50-43 in double overtime, but that's not why the game made headlines. At halftime, left-wing activists took the field and refused to leave when the second half was supposed to start. The protesters demanded that the two schools divest from their fossil fuel investments and cancel their holdings of...