The Instigator
bullslapper
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points
The Contender
stand4something
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points

Is Global Warming man made and Can we stop it?

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
Con Tied Pro
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: 8/21/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,455 times Debate No: 5102
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (52)
Votes (6)

 

bullslapper

Con

Do you believe in Global Warming? I do. But I do not think we can stop it. We know emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are increasing. These green house gases trap heat in earth's atmosphere and thus result in increasing the temperature of earth. The only one we are trying to reduce is carbon dioxide why? Methane produces three times the heat that carbon dioxide does. Why not decrease methane too?

Animals and humans produce methane. You just know that the liberals are not going to let us reduce any animals.
Back when I was a teenager they said over population would cause w
World starvation. Then they tried to encourage birth control as a way to stop it. That flopped big time.
Later on they did get abortion passed saying it was for woman's rights. But that has not worked ether. The Worlds population just keeps growing.

Could it be that Global Warming is natures way of keeping the World's population down if we won't.
Even if we stop all human carbon dioxide production nature still produces 70% of all carbon dioxide and because many Nations are exempt from being green only about 6 % of the 30% is being affected a only drop in the bucket.

But facts don't keep good liberals down, former Vice-President Al Gore has made over 100 million dollars preaching Global Warming. He was even given a Nobel Prize for it. He should have been given "the snake oil salesman"of the century award. He could have taught the old wild West's traveling snake oil sales man a thing or two.

31,072 American scientists signed OISM's petition rejecting claims of "human-caused" global warming. So why is our Government still sticking it to us over Global Warming? Maybe there is still more money to be made .

Personally I love nature. I am all for solar power, wind power and love power But I do not believe we can stop Global warming or that we have caused it.
stand4something

Pro

stand4something forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
bullslapper

Con

A researcher at Russia's oceanology institute says global warming has peaked — and the planet is now headed for a cooling period that will last through the end of the century.

Sorokhtin of the Russian academy of natural sciences says warming and cooling are entirely natural processes — independent of human activity. He says the current warming trend is due to changes in things like solar activity, ocean currents, and salinity fluctuations in Arctic waters.

Note; GE is set to make Billions from their Green products. GE owns ABC TV Network.
ABC has gone Green and pushes Green every day claiming that their motive is pure.
If the belief that Man can not stop Global Warming Became widely accepted They will lose billions .
So don't you think that it is in their interest to keeping people believing that they can do something about it.
I have enjoyed the comments.
Thank You
stand4something

Pro

stand4something forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
52 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
With current trends, the IPCC believes the World could see the temperature increase >5 degrees C on average. http://www.ipcc.ch...

Descriptions of what that means degree by degree can be found here: http://www.marklynas.org...
It's also on the National Geographic website: http://www.ngm.com...

If the world gets 5 or more degrees warmer:
We will lose the Amazon.
We will lose Africa.
We will lose all but Alaska from the USA.
We will lose most of Europe.
Most of Asia will be desert.

No, it's not going to be good for us.

I'm not screaming and shouting.
What would you have me do?
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"
However, there is I believe, extremely strong evidence to suggest we have.
a) A sudden rapid increase in temperatures world-wide coincidental with the industrial revolution.
b) A sudden rapid increase in GHGs coincidental with the industrial revolution. "

A sudden increase in temperatures coincidental with the reduction in the numbers of pirates?

Btw the rise in temperatures started in or after the 1920s I thought, not the Industrial Revolution, which started roughly a century earlier.

And the Tunguska Event also correlates with the rise in temperatures.
Posted by bullslapper 9 years ago
bullslapper
"What's a habitable planet worth?
Basically everything we've got."

Who said that that global Warming would make this planet inhabitable , I didn't .
The Dino's had the longest run in history and that was in a global Warming period .
Did you ever consider how it might be a good thing not a bad thing. I know that a ice age would be a bad thing for use.
global Warming might take away some liveable
land but it would give much more land that could grow food. Why are liberals fighting
something that might be good for us. So people living on the shore lines would haft to move inland no biggie, I am going to do that next year ,they could do that too or build dikes like the Dutch.
When in trouble or in dout run in circle's scream and shout.
The ecosystem in our Great Lakes is natural changing The Liberals do not want it to and want
to spend tax money to stop it. A dumb and dumber.
Posted by Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
Hi Rick, it's good to be less anonymous.
Yep, we've conversed a few times.

It cannot be proven that Man caused GW.
However, there is I believe, extremely strong evidence to suggest we have.
a) A sudden rapid increase in temperatures world-wide coincidental with the industrial revolution.
b) A sudden rapid increase in GHGs coincidental with the industrial revolution.
These GHGs are now at a greater proportion than found anywhere in ice-cores over 450,000 years old.

The GW crowd don't want the planet wrecked, that's all.
If you have a better way of stopping GW than taking from polluters and giving to the cleaners, please let us know!

As I've pointed out earlier in these comments, last year (2007) was our second warmest.
There may well have been record cold temperatures across the world.
Still, the average has gone up.
The predictions are for 2008 to record lower surface temperatures because of ocean current patterns.
How is this possible?
It's because the oceans hold most of the World's GW heat, and we're measuring surface temperatures.

Yes, overfishing has had most of the effect on the World's current fish stocks.
My point is that cooler, more oxygenated waters are more productive.

They Kyoto Protocol, while pathetic compared with what needs to be done, is a start.
Pathetic as it is, the USA still hasn't ratified it.
The Copenhagen Protocol is going to be much tougher. Hopefully everybody will be on board by then.
DId you know that China has installed far more solar water heating than any other country?
They know about pollution in China, and they've got >20 nuclear plants underway.

Nanosolar guarantee that that their PVs will last 25 years. http://www.nanosolar.com...
They may take up more space, but I've got a big roof to coat with only 3 sq metres taken up by solar water heating.

Cheers
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
HI Derek (Im Rick)

Very good and thoughtful responses, as usual ( I think we have had a few energy debates before)

In short, man caused GW is not a fact and is NOT provable

period.

This is NOT to say that pollution doesnt matter, or that we shouldnt get going on renewable energy (solar Hydrogen etc)

my point is that the global warming crowd is MOSTLY about tax schemes - and control schemes

"carbon taxes" are already a FACT is most places

now again, I am going to assert, factually that

(1) in the last year, the earth has gone into cooling- reversing entirely the last ten years or so, where the temp only went up about 0.1F

last year were record cold temperatures across the world

it will be cold again this year and it has been a VERY mild summer

Fish stocks have to do mostly with OVERFISHING . period.

The kyoto protocol was nonsense, and meaningless without China India and Russia, among many others

Now on thin film, I still think they are junk and will break down- I will not sell other than crystalline for now until anything has been out there a minimum of 10 years

amorphous Si has been a proven loser over the years

and the market is global , so even if someone comes in with a 2.50 / DC W wholesale product, why would they sell for less than the market (4$ )

UNLESS their product is junk and wont last

it already takes 2X as much space and racking

my 2 c

SOLARMAN
Posted by Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
Solarman
How has GW been proven "a fraud"?
The eight warmest years in the GISS record have all occurred since 1998.

To answer your nicely numbered questions:
1) Warming is a bad thing on a global scale. Prime Minister Putin thinks GW is great.
However every tropical and sub-tropical country would suffer as would world fish stocks.
The World will have been at its most ecologically productive some time around the ice age
(Australia forested, the Sahara a fraction of its current size, the middle east productive, the oceans vastly more productive.

2) CO2 is now at 387 ppm. http://en.wikipedia.org...
The IPCC's climate change models have included water for the past 5 years.

3) How does one fairly reduce something whose production benefits people world-wide?
If the US had ratified the Kyoto protocol, then reduced its emissions via cleaner technology,
you would be paid for it by the rest of us in the first-world who have increased our emissions.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

4) I'm a GW proponent, and I'm not proposing a tax scheme ;-)
With your name you must be very excited by the rapid advance in thin-film PV's.
These are much cheaper than the old versions and can easily be any shape.
Provided we can keep finding the raw materials for them, this is an excellent sustainable solution.

Cheers
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"
As a Atheist you do not believe in the Bible. Why did you quoit it ?"

To show what stupid things it has to say :d.

"I use to be a Atheist but then I ran some experiments using VooDoo to prove that there was no such thing as the supernatural . "

Show us these experiments, and the peer review involved. Until then it's just an anecdote, not sufficient to mean anything to us.

"If demons are real then Satan is real then God is real."

Does not follow.

"
If you want to find out what Conservatives believe go to this site ran by a Conservative Libertarian ,JJ JACKSON.( "

Either he is a conservative, or he is a libertarian. He cannot be both, since liberty is not the status quo.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
hey kids

isnt this debate about Globaloney Schwarming not God?

Globaloney nonsense is already proven a fraud

the losers trying to push their agenda just happliy fraud on anyway

I have some questions for the GW believer

(1) Is warming necessarily a bad thing anyway ? Isnt an ice age, sure to come, much scarier?

(2) CO2 is only 360 ppm and the models IGNORE H20 which is 100000 ppm in the atmosphere - can you explain why?

(3) we ALL breathe out CO2 - should we be taxed for it?

(4) show me a GW proponent that ISNT proposing some tax scheme based on their scare tactics, rather than

nuclear energy - no CO2

hydrogen energy - no CO2

again, GW based on anthopogenic CO2 emissions is NONSENSE

SOLARMAN
Posted by bullslapper 9 years ago
bullslapper
Rezzealaux
I see from your profile you have no beliefs and just like to argue. That makes you a real pain in the But and its no use talking to you any more. Only small closed minded people have to use cruse words .Once again you have proved you are a very closed minded person who thinks he is enlightened and has self-awareness .Get a life.

Ragnar_Rahl
As a Atheist you do not believe in the Bible. Why did you quoit it ? I use to be a Atheist but then I ran some experiments using VooDoo to prove that there was no such thing as the supernatural . Instead they convinced me their was. If demons are real then Satan is real then God is real.
I went from being a Atheist to being an Agnostic. Then much later a Christian.
I hope some day you evolve and find enlightenment and self-awareness too.
If you want to find out what Conservatives believe go to this site ran by a Conservative Libertarian ,JJ JACKSON.( http://www.thelandofthefree.net... )
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"
Mexicans socialist?
NO most of the wealth is in the hands of about 5 or 6 families . They control the Mexican Government. "

Socialism is government control of the economy. All the wealth being concentrated in the hands of those who, essentially, are the government, is evidence for, not against, Mexico being socialist.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Labrat228 9 years ago
Labrat228
bullslapperstand4somethingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Bushido 9 years ago
Bushido
bullslapperstand4somethingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by sonofzapp 9 years ago
sonofzapp
bullslapperstand4somethingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by lawyer_in_training 9 years ago
lawyer_in_training
bullslapperstand4somethingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 9 years ago
TheSkeptic
bullslapperstand4somethingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
bullslapperstand4somethingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:03