The Instigator
Pro (for)
3 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Climate Change is man caused

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/2/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 838 times Debate No: 69333
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)




My position on climate change is that not only do I believe in it but I believe it is man caused.
I will start My opening argument to state that global warming is a proven fact and anyone that disagrees with me is ignorant on this subject. 97% of scientists believe that climate change is primarily human caused. Also the arguments stated by Human-caused climate change deniers are pointless and not fact driven.
I wish my opponent the best of luck.

Shaftel, H. (Ed.). (2012, January 5). Global Climate Change: Consensus. Retrieved February 3, 2015, from


I look forward to this. Let's get something clear. I am not arguing against global warming. I do agree it is a proven fact, but to indefinitely say it was 'man-caused'? Wrong. To avoid confusion, my position is this: The lack of consensus among public and scientists, lack of funding, the failure to account for other measures, and for the opponents arguments I have yet to credit, global warming cannot be deep-seated to only the actions of mankind. My opponent is insistent on using NASA as his source, so I hope James Henson, former NASA scientist, can explain himself when he says "Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought" [1]


I wish you the best of luck as well.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you. I do not think it is only human-caused that title is put there, because I wouldn't want to put such titles as, "Climate change is sorta man caused". What I am arguing is humans do have a fairly large affect on the rate it is going at. Now for my reliance on NASA for my source, well I used it specifically because it is more well known than than the other sources I found and if you want them then tell if so in your statement and I will happily send you some of them. A scholarly article written by Thomas R. Karl (a climatologist that is the director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration"s National Climatic Data Center.) states, "The main source of global climate change is human-induced changes in atmospheric composition." Now another source I used which granted is from the EPA (but I didn't want to use NASA for my only source) states that the temperature is rose at 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit last century, however it also states small changes in the average temperature of the planet can translate to large and potentially dangerous shifts in climate and weather. Also 2014 was the hottest year on record according to multiple sources (listed bellow) and the 21st century is officially up to date the hottest century. I wish my opponent luck
Karl, T. R. "Modern Global Climate Change." Science 15.1 (2003): 1719-723. Print.
"Basics." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, 15 Apr. 2013. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <;

Hottest Year/century on record sources:
"21st Century 'hottest' on Record as Global Warming Continues - UN." UN News Center. UN, 2 Feb. 2015. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <;.
"2014 Was Officially the Hottest Year on Record." Time. Time. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <;.
"2014 Officially Hottest Year on Record." Scientific American Global RSS. Web. 4 Feb. 2015. <


Thank you for clarifying on that. I think you were hoping to win the debate just on that title, which in itself speaks indefinitely. I have to clarify some things, because I don"t think we have a debate here. First, the title is plain wrong. Climate change happens regardless of human activity. It "can be explained by natural causes, such as changes in solar energy, volcanic eruptions, and natural changes in greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations." (the same EPA source as my opponent). The last time CO2 levels were as high as today, it was around 15 million years ago. During that time, species still thrived. Second, burning fossil fuels is the most cost-effective, and the least damaging. Yes, I said least damaging. I won"t get into how because that is not the subject of our debate. Here are just a few:
Long gone is the time when most scientists scratched their heads about ice caps melting. Yes, 2014 is the hottest year. Yes, climate change is happening. But at the same time, we are putting planks for a global cooling, in a sense. As of right now, I can safely say we are utilizing more renewable energy than at any other time in our existence. As for my opponents sources, I don"t see any of them mentioning that. I"m sorry, but the subject of your sources (yubanet, epa, time, scientific american) either state what global warming is, or are in redundant in stating "2014 is the hottest year". None of them are the subject of human activity causing global warming. If you still insist of debating the topic, I would be glad to, although as I"ve mentioned, there really is no debate.
Debate Round No. 2


Thank you very much, I thank you for this debate.


Climate change is quite complicated and requires more than two minds. Climate change is happening, but is it man caused? Again, we don't know, but I have come to argue it is not. There was never enough research done on the natural causes of climate change, so we just naturally assumed it was man caused. You see where I'm going with this. It is conditional on evidence. I thank you for the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Jupiter1 2 years ago
Jonnykelly, you the aggregate of stupidity.
Educate yourself.
Posted by Jonnykelly 2 years ago
Jupiter1, those "Facts" rely on the earth being over a million years old, which is still subject of skepticism.
Posted by Jupiter1 2 years ago
I can give you many. What do you consider to be a reliable source?
Posted by Josh_debate 2 years ago
@Jupiter that gave no real evidence, just left wing propaganda. if it is really happening than give me one proof.
Posted by Jupiter1 2 years ago
josh-debate, hate to be the messenger, but you lack the basic understanding of what global warming is. Here:

Educate yourself.
Posted by Josh_debate 2 years ago
there is no proof that global warming is even happening
Posted by I-AM-AWESOME 2 years ago
it cut off my citations due to the length of my argument

Extremely embarrassed and sorry about that.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe both sides could have done better and provided better reasoning for their claims. Pro started with a very compelling argument that 97% of scientists believe that global warming was man caused. Con didn't challenge that claim but instead showed a report that suggests that there isn't enough evidence to support that the "climate is headed [...] toward more extreme heat and drought". Pro failed to realize that this was a red herring. I vote Pro.