The Instigator
ny2244111
Pro (for)
Tied
42 Points
The Contender
pcmbrown
Con (against)
Tied
42 Points

Global Warming is a scam by liberals

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/7/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,288 times Debate No: 8155
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (12)

 

ny2244111

Pro

The media coverage on pollution affecting global warming on a grand scale is a scam lead by liberals such as Al Gore, Michael Moore and the liberal media.
pcmbrown

Con

Media coverage of global warming is by no means a "scam". Scam: "a fraudulent business scheme" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Also, please note that "on a grand scale" relates to the universality of the impact, not its magnitude.

It is my opponents' responsibility to prove that pollution has, in no way, good or bad, affected global warming. In addition, he must prove that media coverage of said topic is a "scam".

My opponent has given no evidence to support his outrageous argument. When he does so, I shall provide my refutations.
Debate Round No. 1
ny2244111

Pro

It's become a pattern with you and your fellow liberals on this site, that you the dissect the argument stated when knowing what was implied. Such a style of debating is quite boring and time consuming.

So to dissect the meaning of "scam" which you stated "a fraudulent business scheme" is silly. There are a lot of different definitions for words. Here is another for scam: "a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation" - http://dev.m-w.com.... Here is another for on a "grand-scale" which states the phrase directly relates to magnitude. - http://dictionary.reference.com....

So my request is to stop playing games with these words on online dictionaries and to debate the argument, knowing the impied meaning behind it.

The reason for my beliefs about global warming being a scam on a grand-scale is that I believe it was a way to make money off of good spirited Americans. I was shown Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" in college by a liberal economics professor as though Al Gore's rhetoric was the word of an almighty God. There was no room for debate on this issue in school.

The liberals love to talk about the scientists who agree that global warming is caused by our own pollution here on Earth. If this we're the case, why is Mars getting warmer? Our sun is a star. Star's grow. Every scientist believes this as well. And if you believe this, you must say global warming is inevitable.

Also, since when is every scientist automatically considered correct about everything. Would you say the same of every politician about politics, teachers on teaching, doctors on medicine. I just wish liberals would stop taking pictures of the ice caps when they are melting which happens every year and start being real. I'm in favor of environmental responsibility. Who isn't? I am just not in favor of scaring and hoaxing every day hard working Americans.
pcmbrown

Con

Definitions:
My opponent agrees that a scam is inherently "fraudulent". This implies that the intent is deceitful. Therefore, my opponent must demonstrate deceitful intent by said liberals.

Case:
Essentially, my opponent merely argues an alternative cause to global warming. The article which he draws it from calls this idea "one scientist's controversial theory". The article goes on to explain that "Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists." On the other hand, the correlation between pollution and global warming is supported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a respected panel of scientists. Alos, note that the scientist of the article proposes that "Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years."

Clearly, the case for global warming is far more supported than that of my opponent's alternative.
Debate Round No. 2
ny2244111

Pro

ny2244111 forfeited this round.
pcmbrown

Con

Extend my arguments. Thanks for reading, and vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Kefka 8 years ago
Kefka
"Liberals" and "Conservatives" are just ignorant labels by ignorant people. The mainstream parties of our media driven society don't exist, they are only foundations on which political demagogues use to attain power. People feel the need always to pick a side, and stick with whatever they say, regardless of their personal opinion, because they don't want to be the black sheep (Party Unity). And my position is exactly what Geo said. :P
Posted by rangersfootballclub 8 years ago
rangersfootballclub
SON OF A BITCH LIBERALS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wow
Posted by GeoLaureate8 8 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Yes, I'm referring to the Neo-Cons. Today, they are just considered conservatives.
Posted by ny2244111 8 years ago
ny2244111
I agree with GeoLaureate8 on this part of the statement:

"The Earth is increasingly getting hotter, but so is the rest of the solar system. This is what the global elites don't want you to know. Instead they are blaming the people so that they can impose their carbon tax and take more freedoms away with carbon footprint ratings and regulations."

Don't agree on this part:

"Global warming is not a Liberal scam. Liberals and Conservatives are two different horns of the same devil. "

Conservatives and liberals are not the same. Republicans and Democrats maybe two different horns of the same devil (Hence the ever popular phrase Republicrats). But I would argue that we haven't had true conservatism since Coolidge. By nature conservatives would be against government intervention. But I'm pretty sure you meant the so called "conservative" Republicans who we've had running for office lately and for that I would have to agree with you. But conservative is not always synonymous with Republicans.
Posted by Yakaspat 8 years ago
Yakaspat
I totally and fully agree with GeoLaureate8.
www.infowars.com
Posted by GeoLaureate8 8 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Global warming is not a Liberal scam. Liberals and Conservatives are two different horns of the same devil. Global warming is both a reality and a lie. The Earth is increasingly getting hotter, but so is the rest of the solar system. This is what the global elites don't want you to know. Instead they are blaming the people so that they can impose their carbon tax and take more freedoms away with carbon footprint ratings and regulations.
Posted by rangersfootballclub 8 years ago
rangersfootballclub
THOSE LIBERAL BASTARDS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wow caught up in the moment again
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
@heyitsjay:

Want to know the major difference between this website and youtube? The title and intention: DEBATE.org
Posted by heyitsjay 8 years ago
heyitsjay
I do hate it when people partake in disputing the debate and making a scene about it in the comments page...sorry just my opinion though I do understand why people do endure it sometimes.
See youtube for example!
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
For something to be a scam, there has to be malicious intentions -- I'm pretty sure libs really do believe in global warming -- unless, of course, you're referring to some grand conspiracy, in which case that'd be friken cool.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by MTGandP 8 years ago
MTGandP
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Steven123 8 years ago
Steven123
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Agnostic 8 years ago
Agnostic
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by tribefan011 8 years ago
tribefan011
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by happypanda 8 years ago
happypanda
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by alto2osu 8 years ago
alto2osu
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Larsness 8 years ago
Larsness
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by slobodow 8 years ago
slobodow
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by harlequin 8 years ago
harlequin
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by ny2244111 8 years ago
ny2244111
ny2244111pcmbrownTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70