The Instigator
TOMlive
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
feverish
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points

Global warming is a hoax

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  
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: 11/11/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,125 times Debate No: 10062
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (5)

 

TOMlive

Pro

I want my opponent to go first, and also I would prefer to debate someone who believes in carbon footprints as well
feverish

Con

Hello and thanks to my opponent, I wish him luck and I hope that this debate will be a satisfying and enlightening one for both of us.

Despite the fact that my opponent is the instigator and Pro for the resolution, he has requested that I start the debate. I have no problem with this as long as he acknowledges his burden of proof and presents some arguments of his own, rather than merely rebutting mine.

_________

Definitions.

My opponent has not provided us with any definitions and I feel that it is imperative that we at least define the key terms in the resolution if we are to have a meaningful debate.

1. Global warming.

The issue of global warming can be interpreted many ways as discussed on the DDO fans Wiki page. http://ddofans.com...

Wikipedia describes global warming as "the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans since the mid-20th century and its projected continuation." When most people speak of global warming however they are generally referring to the well accepted theory "that most of the observed temperature increase since the middle of the 20th century was caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases resulting from human activity such as fossil fuel burning and deforestation." http://en.wikipedia.org...

I can't be sure if my opponent wishes to limit the discussion strictly to global warming or include wider examples of climate change. http://en.wikipedia.org...

Similarly I can't be sure if he's referring to the existence of global warming/climate change or the assertion that its effects are exacerbated or caused by human actions.

I will assume that my opponent wishes to discuss human contribution to climate change but whichever of these ideas of global warming he refers to, I believe the word 'hoax' is an inaccurate description.

2. Hoax.

There is much less room for misinterpretation with this term.

Although some hoaxes may be playful and others more malicious, implicit within every reliable definition of the word is the notion of intentional deceit. http://www.google.co.uk...

________

I do believe that the planet is getting warmer and that the climate is changing. I also believe it is quite probable that the primary cause of this is human and that human actions are affecting it. However these beliefs are quite irrelevant to the debate at hand.

My opponent is claiming that the scientists who believe this (and they are very much in the majority) are not merely mistaken, not merely incorrect and not even merely deluded but that they are wilfully misleading the public and the government with this information.

I see no basis, suggestion or motive for the level of conspiracy that this would entail.

According to the 2007 UN report "Evidence is now ‘unequivocal' that humans are causing global warming" http://www.un.org...

Even the US government has accepted the truth back in 2002 http://news.bbc.co.uk...
and it is also acknowledged by NASA. http://www.nasa.gov...

The denial of climate change and its human causes is essentially the propaganda of big businesses who don't want to risk compromising their profits for the sake of something as insignificant as sustaining the planet for future generations. It is no secret that major political parties are funded by these companies, yet according to my opponent, it is the mainstream scientists rather than the skeptics with a political agenda that represent the conspiracy.

The scientific consensus on global warming is clear.

"the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities" http://www.sciencemag.org...

"a list of quotes from scientific organizations, academies, scientists, industry spokesmen, etc supporting the existence of man made climate change and the need to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." http://logicalscience.com...

I have no idea what my opponent means by "believ[ing] in carbon footprints" but it doesn't seem to affect the resolution. A carbon footprint is simply a term for the amount of carbon pollution caused by an individual, a company or a nation. It is an abstract concept rather than a tangible object but I don't see how one could "disbelieve" it without also disbelieving in the existence of carbon itself.

I will now hand over to Pro for his arguments on how and why "global warming is a hoax".

Thanks.

Con.
Debate Round No. 1
TOMlive

Pro

TOMlive forfeited this round.
feverish

Con

My opponent has forfeited, even though he has been on line in the last few hours. Hopefully he will post an argument next round or, if he doesn't wish to debate, at least have the decency to concede.

In the meantime, extend my arguments.

Thanks.
Debate Round No. 2
TOMlive

Pro

I apologize to my opponent as i was actually in jail for a dui i got six months ago. lol. Actually i went to court every time i was supposed to, and they kept just pending the charges. Finally on the last court date, they told me that all i have on my record is a MJ possession charge. Little did i know the day AFTER my last court date the dea filed the DUI and never notified me, so when i payed the mj charge the next month i found out i had a warrant for my arrest and i has to urn myself. ANyway someday i'd like to finish this debate, im sorry for not being to clear about what i want to debate. Basically i (like many other scientists) do not believe in anyway humans have any affect on the climate, not do i think that co2 Has any contribution to the temperature of our earth, that is just a ridiculous belief. heres a little excerpt

If you think humans are the cause for the earth's rise in temperature about 10 years ago you are sadly wrong.

The cause of all global warming is the sun. period.

Right now our sun is experiencing very mild solar activity, expect cooler temperatures! Near real time NASA image of the sun (SOHO MDI Latest Image).
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...
feverish

Con

I'm sorry to hear about my opponent's legal troubles, although I must confess to having far more sympathy regarding the possession charge than the driving one.

My opponent has made no attempt to prove his resolution and has ignored all my arguments and evidence.

He claims to be among a number of "scientists" who reject the standard hypothesis of human impact on climate change but provides zero evidence to back up his assertions.

He says the notion that co2 can "affect" temperature is a "ridiculous belief" but doesn't touch on any of the evidence supporting it I provided in round 1.

He claims that "The cause of all global warming is the sun. period." This is factually incorrect. Warm air currents, different rates of heat refraction and humidity can all create increased temperatures. http://www.bbc.co.uk...

My opponent's only source in this debate is a big yellow circle. This is an image of the sun provided by NASA, who I have already sourced in support of human impact on climate. The image comes with no text to support my opponent's position or to contradict my earlier quote from NASA.

Most crucially of all, TOMlive has made no attempt to support his assertion that "global warming is a hoax" or deliberate deception.

The resolution is completely negated and no effort has even been made to affirm it.

Due to my opponent's forfeit, this debate won't show up on the front page. I can't vote myself so I can only request that my opponent also abstains from voting and that anyone taking the time to read this will be kind enough to cast their vote according to DDO guidelines.

Thanks.

Con.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by TOMlive 7 years ago
TOMlive
thank you :)
Posted by feverish 7 years ago
feverish
I'm glad giving yourself 7 unjustified points amuses you Tom. Well done.
Posted by TOMlive 7 years ago
TOMlive
:P haha
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 4 years ago
Man-is-good
TOMlivefeverishTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's forfeit--> one point for Con though I do hope that his legal troubles do pass away. Note that Con gave evidence sufficient to win the debate; noting the scientific consensus on human causes of global warming as well as the propaganda promoted by big businesses. Pro refuted none of the arguments and his only source was a picture of the sun. His only argument--"The cause of all global warming is the sun. period" was refuted since there were other causes ("Warm air currents" for example).
Vote Placed by kalyse020908 7 years ago
kalyse020908
TOMlivefeverishTied
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 ToastOfDestiny 7 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
TOMlivefeverishTied
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 GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
TOMlivefeverishTied
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 TOMlive 7 years ago
TOMlive
TOMlivefeverishTied
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