Debate Rounds (5)
According to University of Colorado environmental scientist Roger Pielk, there is in fact a reason to argue global warming. Pielk testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, this included, California"s Barbara Boxer, Rhode Island"s Sheldon Whitehouse, and Vermont"s Bernie Sanders. "Hurricanes have not increased in the U.S. in frequency, intensity or normalized damage since at least 1900," Pielke added. "The same holds for tropical cyclones globally since at least 1970."" (He also noted) that U.S. floods have not increased in "frequency or intensity" since 1950 and economic losses from floods have dropped by 75 percent as a percentage of GDP since 1940. Tornado frequency, intensity, and normalized damages have also not increased since 1950, and Pielke even notes that there is some evidence that this has declined." droughts have been shorter, less frequent, and have covered a smaller portion of the U.S over the last century. Globally, there has been very little change in the last 60 years, he said." http://frontpagemag.com......
There has been a 1.4 degree increase in global temperature from 1907-present and the past 10 years have been the highest in recorded history. The United States only makes up 2% of the world"s surface, so the claim that the hurricane and weather patterns in the U.S. have showed little change would mean very little in the global sense. The ocean temperature has been consistently rising over the last century, yet another indicator that Global Climate Change is real and happening. In addition, The CO2 composition of the atmosphere has been climbing to unprecedented levels, causing the heat from the sun to stay within our atmosphere rather than flow out.
Next I would like to address the concept of "global cooling". While in an observable sense it does seem reasonable that cooler weather could not result from global warming, the actuality of it ties into the ocean and polar ice caps. Water is unique in that it is most dense as a liquid and when it's at 4"C, rather than the typical model of the solid being denser than the liquid. Because the seas surrounding Arctic areas and ice caps are usually just below freezing (the salt lowers the freezing point) the ice caps melt into water that is actually warmer than the sea, which explains both the rise in sea temperature and water level globally. As the resulting shift in ocean currents continues, the effect on temperature on land appears to be cooling; however, the reason for the drop in atmospheric temperature is actually directly tied into the ocean changes caused by melting ice caps. Therefore, the root of this "global cooling" is actually global warming. Perhaps a more apt term, agreeably, would be Global Climate Change, but this does not change the fact that serious change is happening right now and is a serious issue.
According to "a really inconvenient truth:Since 1998, 31,000 scientists have signed a petition agreeing with the fact that there is no scientific evidence or consensus that man-made global warming exists while the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has the support of only 2,500 scientists. It has been estimated that we have spent around $106.7 billion of taxpayer money from 2003-2010 to try to understand" global warming. And the spending doesn't stop there. The same research shows the government has proposed to spend around $1.4 billion in 2012 alone on climate change issues. The fact of the matter is we are spending large amounts of money on an issue that there is no scientific evidence to back.
ddaguannoNHS forfeited this round.
"Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening." "Timothy Ball
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest fraud in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.
http://www.petitionproject.org...). So while the small percentage of uninformed biologists or chemists who also signed this and somehow amassed a number of 31,000 signatures, the only qualified to be making such claims in the field are the 39 climatologists. As if only having only 39 even remotely valid opinions wasn't weak enough, of these 39, only two-- yes, two-- of these climatologists are even in the top 200 most published climatologists. As being published is generally a testament to a scientist's expertise in a field, these two climatologists make up only 1% of the top climatologists around the world. The overwhelming majority of climatologists clearly respect the obvious fact that global warming is real and needs to be addressed.
This issue is pushed forward by a statement issued by the Joint Science Academies on Global Climate Change (http://nationalacademies.org...). The very first heading is straight to the point: Climate Change is Real. However you can continue to try to downplay Climate change by calling it "cooling" repetitively, if you really want to. It doesn't make the actual issue go away, but the cooling, as earlier explained, is simply a byproduct of the warming.
A really hard question is faced now. Who do you believe? The 31,000 scientists who signed an Op-Ed, among which only 2 were legitimately qualified to be making such claims? Possibly. Perhaps, however, you choose to believe the leading scientists and climatologists from every primary developed country in the world, who felt that it was necessary to bring this issue to the forefront of the world and confront the problem with an international effort because its effects were so drastic. The choice is yours, of course, but in general I usually pick the best in the world over the only 39 climatologists in the world who feel that global warming is not a serious threat.
rdambrosionhs forfeited this round.
The Natural Resources Defense Counsel, the primary community authority on global climate change clearly states that climate change is the single biggest environmental and humanitarian crisis of our time. The Earth's atmosphere is overloaded with heat-trapping carbon dioxide, which threatens large-scale disruptions in climate with disastrous consequences. What this means is that humans must act now to spur the adoption of cleaner energy sources at home and abroad, rather than trying to convince ourselves that global climate change is a hoax and letting the problem get worse before we address it.
rdambrosionhs forfeited this round.
ddaguannoNHS forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.