The Instigator
owen99999
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SANTORUM2012
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Global warming exists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/8/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 793 times Debate No: 21823
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

owen99999

Pro

I will be arguing that global warming (the process of the earth's atmosphere increasing in temperature time due to the greenhouse effect) exists. I saw on your profile you don't believe it does exist and hope this debate will not only be for debating practice but also might change your mind. Please do not worry first round is not just acceptance, put all the evidence you can in there!

I hope you accept this debate.
Owen
SANTORUM2012

Con

Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research. A study by Swiss and German scientists suggests that increasing radiation from the sun is responsible for recent global climate changes. Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures. [Telegraph 18/7/04]

They say that over the last century the number of sunspots rose at the same time that the Earth's climate became steadily warmer. [BBC 7/6/04]

Global warming and melting polar ice caps are not just problems here on Earth. Mars is facing similar global changes, researchers say, with temperatures across the red planet rising by around 0.65 degrees over the last few decades. [Register]

Sunspots - 9/27/2001

Click for full size

For about 300 years Jupiter's banded atmosphere has shown a remarkable feature to telescopic viewers, a large swirling storm system known as The Great Red Spot. In 2006, another red storm system appeared, actually seen to form as smaller whitish oval-shaped storms merged and then developed the curious reddish hue.

Now, Jupiter has a third red spot, again produced from a smaller whitish storm. ... Jupiter's recent outbreak of red spots is likely related to large scale climate change as the gas giant planet is getting warmer near the equator. [NASA]

Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980; furthermore, infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that the planet has been warming steadily from 1980 to 2004. As they say on Neptune, global warming has become an inconvenient truth. [World Climate Report]

Source
http://whatreallyhappened.com...
Debate Round No. 1
owen99999

Pro

owen99999 forfeited this round.
SANTORUM2012

Con

SANTORUM2012 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
owen99999

Pro

Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues to accumulate heat. This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming.

The line of empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming is as follows:

We're raising CO2 levels

Human carbon dioxide emissions are calculated from international energy statistics, tabulating coal, brown coal, peat, and crude oil production by nation and year, going back to 1751. CO2 emissions have increased dramatically over the last century, climbing to the rate of 29 billion tonnes of CO2 per year in 2006 (EIA).

Atmospheric CO2 levels are measured at hundreds of monitoring stations across the globe. Independent measurements are also conducted by airplanes and satellites. For periods before 1958, CO2 levels are determined from air bubbles trapped in polar ice cores. In pre-industrial times over the last 10,000 years, CO2 was relatively stable at around 275 to 285 parts per million. Over the last 250 years, atmospheric CO2 levels have increased by about 100 parts per million. Currently, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing by around 15 gigatonnes every year.


Figure 1: Atmospheric CO2 levels (Green is Law Dome ice core, Blue is Mauna Loa, Hawaii) and Cumulative CO2 emissions (CDIAC). While atmospheric CO2 levels are usually expressed in parts per million, here they are displayed as the amount of CO2 residing in the atmosphere in gigatonnes. CO2 emissions includes fossil fuel emissions, cement production and emissions from gas flaring.

Humans are emitting more than twice as much CO2 as what ends up staying there. Nature is reducing our impact on climate by absorbing more than half of our CO2 emissions. The amount of human CO2 left in the air, called the airborne fraction, has hovered around 43% since 1958.

CO2 traps heat.

According to radiative physics and decades of laboratory measurements, increased CO2 in the atmosphere is expected to absorb more infrared radiation as it escapes back out to space. In 1970, NASA launched the IRIS satellite measuring infrared spectra. In 1996, the Japanese Space Agency launched the IMG satellite which recorded similar observations. Both sets of data were compared to discern any changes in outgoing radiation over the 26 year period (Harries 2001). What they found was a drop in outgoing radiation at the wavelength bands that greenhouse gases such as CO2 and methane (CH4) absorb energy. The change in outgoing radiation was consistent with theoretical expectations. Thus the paper found "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect". This result has been confirmed by subsequent papers using data from later satellites (Griggs 2004, Chen 2007).


Figure 2: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases. 'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001).

When greenhouse gases absorb infrared radiation, the energy heats the atmosphere which in turn re-radiates infrared radiation in all directions. Some makes its way back to the earth's surface. Hence we expect to find more infrared radiation heading downwards. Surface measurements from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of infrared radiation returning to earth (Wang 2009). A regional study over the central Alps found that downward infrared radiation is increasing due to the enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004). Taking this a step further, an analysis of high resolution spectral data allowed scientists to quantitatively attribute the increase in downward radiation to each of several greenhouse gases (Evans 2006). The results lead the authors to conclude that"this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming."


Figure 3: Spectrum of the greenhouse radiation measured at the surface. Greenhouse effect from water vapor is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006).

The planet is accumulating heat

When there is more energy coming in than escaping back out to space, our climate accumulates heat. The planet's total heat build up can be derived by adding up the heat content from the ocean, atmosphere, land and ice (Murphy 2009). Ocean heat content was determined down to 3000 metres deep. Atmospheric heat content was calculated from the surface temperature record and heat capacity of the troposphere. Land and ice heat content (eg - the energy required to melt ice) were also included.


Figure 4: Total Earth Heat Content from 1950 (Murphy 2009). Ocean data taken fromDomingues et al 2008.

From 1970 to 2003, the planet has been accumulating heat at a rate of 190,260 gigawatts with the vast majority of the energy going into the oceans. Considering a typical nuclear power plant has an output of 1 gigawatt, imagine 190,000 nuclear power plants pouring their energy output directly into our oceans. What about after 2003? A map of of ocean heat from 2003 to 2008 was constructed from ocean heat measurements down to 2000 metres deep (von Schuckmann 2009). Globally, the oceans have continued to accumulate heat to the end of 2008 at a rate of 0.77 ± 0.11 Wm?2, consistent with other determinations of the planet's energy imbalance (Hansen 2005, Trenberth 2009). The planet continues to accumulate heat.


Figure 5: Time series of global mean heat storage (0–2000 m), measured in 108 Jm-2.

So we see a direct line of evidence that we're causing global warming. Human CO2 emissions far outstrip the rise in CO2 levels. The enhanced greenhouse effect is confirmed by satellite and surface measurements. The planet's energy imbalance is confirmed by summations of the planet's total heat content and ocean heat measurements.

The science used in this argument is chemically quite complex though if you struggle to understand it, just have a look at the diagrams. This is basically proof that more CO2 = higher temperature.


Sources:
http://climate.nasa.gov...
http://www.icr.org...
http://www.scientificamerican.com...

Much of the content comes from studies at universities I have access to (eg diagrams). Most of this argument is from a short piece I wrote on the subject though I've made a few changes to suite the style of debate.org . All of the other sources are listed there. I tried hyperlinking them but it may not have worked.

Cheers
Owen
SANTORUM2012

Con

SANTORUM2012 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
owen99999

Pro

Please put your response in this round thankyou.
SANTORUM2012

Con

SANTORUM2012 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
Too bad the debate flamed out.

There is no real debate on whether the earth is warming, whether CO2 causes warming, or whether CO2 is increasing. The debate is about how much warming is due to CO2. CO2 crisis proponents say the effects of CO2 warming are multiplied substantially by induced additional water vapor. The problem with the theory is that there has been no net increase in temperatures since the late 1990's. he Global Warming Hockey Stick in the late 90s predicted we would al be toast by now, but instead temperature have stayed warm but have bounced around without increasing.

One major defect in the CO2 models was failure to account for natural periodic ocean current phenomena. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation causes the arctic to melt about every 60 years. It's now refreezing rapidly.
Posted by owen99999 4 years ago
owen99999
Well the diagrams haven't shown up... There's not much I can do about that but have a read anyway it mostly makes sense.
Posted by owen99999 4 years ago
owen99999
Sh*t sorry I didn't have time to write a response because I've been ill (infected toe operation OWW). Please just forfiet the round and I'll respond next round.

Cheers
Owen
No votes have been placed for this debate.