The Instigator
ant981228
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Willoweed
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Kyoto and Gl. Warm. Theory Should be Abandoned Unless Impact on Environment is Objectively Proven

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 11/26/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,111 times Debate No: 19493
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

ant981228

Pro

I experienced slight formatting difficulties with this and apologise for any confusion that may result.

I'm sure you've heard it all before: rising global temperatures, melting glaciers around the poles, greenhouse gases, deforestation, rising sea levels and advanced mutation of various exotic diseases have all been in the media spotlight at some time over the past decade. Multiple influential politicians like Al Gore have all spoken out in favor of environmental action. However, over the course of my research, I have discovered that most climatologists don't seem to agree. I will refute these phenomena in order by citing facts from various sources. Because this is such a scientifically oriented topic, I have stayed away from emotional statements to the best of my ability and encourage my opponent to do the same.

I should break now to define some key terms:

Global warming is the theory that increased levels of carbon dioxide and certain other gases are causing an increase in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere due to the greenhouse effect.

The Kyoto Protocol sets binding targets for "37 industrialized targets and the European Community for reducing GHG [Greenhouse Gas] emissions... By five percent against 1990 levels... [between] 2008-2012. (http://unfccc.int...)."

If the Kyoto Protocol is to be quoted in this debate, I request that the copy at http://unfccc.int... be used for our mutual convenience.

Back to the arguments (key statements have been written in bold):

Firstly, let me refute the "major Antarctic melting sea ice problem" statement. Before I do so, I must establish whether or not we agree on the following statements: that the Antarctic Peninsula encompasses approx. 2% of the continent, and that Antarctica contains 90% of the world's ice (http://www.gma.org...). Please reply to this in your response.
  • Now to the refutation: according to a report in the Science Magazine in an article titled "Interpretation of Recent Southern Hemisphere Climate Change" by Thompson, D.W.J., and Solomon, S., 2002, Antarctic peninsula has warmed several degrees while interior has cooled somewhat. Ice shelves have retreated but sea ice has increased . The link to the abstract can be found here: http://www.sciencemag.org...
    • Unfortunately, you have to sign up for the full article, something I haven't done.
  • The article found at http://www.daycreek.com... conclusively proves that the earth was warmer than it is today during the last four interglacials, dating back 420,000 years.
  • http://journals.ametsoc.org...(2000)013%3C1674%3AVATIAS%3E2.0.CO%3B2 references a slight cooling trend over the past 20 years, according to a consensus between satellite and ground stations.
  • Ian Joughin and Slawek Tulaczyk used "ice-flow velocity measurements from synthetic aperture radar to reassess the mass balance of the Ross Ice Streams, West Antarctica... find strong evidence for ice-sheet growth (+26.8 gigatons per year)." Their findings can be found at http://www.sciencemag.org....
  • "Climate models generally predict amplified warming in polar regions as observed in Antarctica’speninsula region over the second half of the 20th century. Although previous reports suggest slight recent continental warming ,our spatial analysis of Antarctic meteorological data demonstrates a net cooling on the Antarctic continent between 1966 and 2000, particularly during summer and autumn. The McMurdo Dry Valleys have cooled by 0.7 8C per decade between 1986 and 2000, with similar pronounced seasonal trends." http://atoc.colorado.edu...

Now for the carbon dioxide:

  • Carbon dioxide levels have grown only seventy parts per million in the past 50 years. (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov...) In the scheme of Kyoto, which decreases CO2 levels by 5% of 1990 levels (17.5ppm), this shows that such implementation would have an insignificant impact on the atmosphere, decreasing levels by only around 3% of 2010 levels (same source).
  • The margin of error for this measurement, according to the same source, is 0.11 ppm.
  • According to http://www.futurepundit.com..., increasing CO2 rates will stimulate plant growth and therefore be beneficial to the human race.

Deforestation:

  • Deforestation has not been scientifically tied with global warming.

Rising Sea Levels:

  • http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov... says that "The mean sea level trend is -1.74 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence
    interval of +/- 0.91 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from
    1964 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of -0.57 feet in 100 years." at that station.
  • http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov... says that "The mean sea level trend is 0.57 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence
    interval of +/- 0.42 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from
    1943 to 2009 which is equivalent to a change of 0.19 feet in 100 years." at that station.
  • http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov... says that "The mean sea level trend is 1.64 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence
    interval of +/- 0.80 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from
    1937 to 1971 which is equivalent to a change of 0.54 feet in 100 years."
  • Aside from the abovementioned measurements, It has been scientifically proven that sea levels have been rising at roughly the same rate (10-20cm per hundred years, or 4-8 in. every hundred years) for the past 6000 years, and even faster than that beginning at 15000 years ago. (http://www.grida.no...) This rate has not accellerated and many computer models say this trend will be reversed within the next few hundred years.
  • Rising sea levels are clearly not a currently global phenomenon.

It would be counter-productive to the purpose of the debate if my opponent references computer models as these contain errors of up to 300% as seen in their failure to predect the large El Nino of 1998. Computer models of weather rarely predict accurately two days from the time of prediction, so assuming accuracy years from the time of prediction is ridiculous.

Conclusion:

Kyoto and Global Warming Theory Should be Abandoned Unless Impact on Environment is Objectively Proven

Although the politically convenient movement is no longer in the global spotlight, we still spend an enormous amount of money on green energy etc. For instance, Obama invested $535 million dollars in the Solyndra which still ended up bankrupt (http://www.time.com...). Considering that all this money is flowing out of the US to prevent a catastrophe that may or may not exist, it is necessary that an objective review of all the past studies on the subject be conducted and further environmental spending be severely reduced if the outcome is determined by the facts cited above. Also considering the evidence regarding the ineffectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol, I belive that the Global Warming Crisis is much exaggerated and funding to prevent this Crisis should be regulated accordingly. Clearly, Global Warming Theories and the Kyoto protocol should be respectively disregarded and annulled.

I look forward to your response,
ant981228






Willoweed

Con

1)Not all regions are expected to warm or warm at the same rate due to several factors. The main factor being melting use cooling ocean currents and therefore cooling land areas by the ocean. I also like to point out that even your source says that greenhouse gasses warm up the earth.
2)Yes the earth has gone through warming and cooling periods before in the past, however this is irrelevant given that today's current warming isn't due to "natural" causes but instead by human activities.
3) As I mentioned in number 1. Some areas are expected to cool due to the melting of ice cooling ocean currents. The earth as a whole has been warming steadily for decades now with the 10 hottest years ever recorded occurring since 1998. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov...
http://data.giss.nasa.gov...
4)Total ice volume in the articcs has been steadily decreasing for decades now; ice levels have decreased by 81% since 1980. http://thinkprogress.org...
5)A climate model set up in the mid 70's has accurately predicted earth's temperature for the past 30 years, given that this was done 30 years ago it can be said that current models would be even better at predicting warming trends. http://thinkprogress.org...
6)My opponent is not correct. If every country lowered greenhouse gas emissions to 5% below 1990 levels then that effect alone would eventually result in a 0.4 degrees Celsius fall in temperatures which is a significant sum (I will go into the ill-effects of greenhouse gasses and global warming/climate change later in my post)
7)My opponent claims that deforestation is not contributing to global warming; this claim by my opponent is entirely false. Deforestation results in forest soaking up less Carbon and therefore resulting in higher Carbon concentrations. Around 25% of the warming trend attributed to Carbon
8)can be attributed to deforestation. http://www.fao.org...
9)Sea levels have been steady rising for the past 130 years. http://upload.wikimedia.org...

Now I will list the effects of climate change/global warming/greenhouse gas emissions and its estimated costs to the world (estimates are rough)
10)Tropical storms have increased by 100% due to global warming. This results in 6,000 more deaths and 60 billion more in damages each year. http://www.newscientist.com...
http://www.undp.org...
http://nordhaus.econ.yale.edu...

11)Droughts have increased by 300% since 1970 due to global warming, this results in 23,000 extra deaths and 45 billion in lost economic growth each year.
http://www.ens-newswire.com...
http://www.ucar.edu... http://www.wateryear2003.org...

12)Floods have increased by 500% resulting in 20,000 extra deaths and around 45 billion in damages each year. http://maps.grida.no...
http://unesdoc.unesco.org...

Decreased crop yields. Due to climate change corn, wheat, soy, rice and muscle yields have decreased costing more than 60 billion dollars in 2009 alone. http://www.agricommodityprices.com...
http://www.soyatech.com...
http://www.sciencenews.org...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.google.com...

13)Other effects of climate change is an increase in tornadoes, wild fires, heat waves, winter storms, a decrease in fish populations due to increasing the acidity of bodies of water, and a decrease In the protective Ozone laywer.

14)There are also many negative health effects that are caused primarily by Carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions. For example this includes but does not exclude increases in cancer, autism, lung diseases, hay fever, decreases in IQ, obesity, diabetes, heart diseases, and an increase in malaria and other mosquito transported diseases.

When you include all the negative health/environmental effects of greenhouse gas emissions one finds that coal/oil/gas cost two times MORE than clean alternatives such as wind and solar. http://thinkprogress.org...
http://thinkprogress.org...
http://www.reuters.com...
Debate Round No. 1
ant981228

Pro

"1)Not all regions are expected to warm or warm at the same rate due to several factors. The main factor being melting use cooling ocean currents...."

In the rebuttal of your first point, I will interpret your statement as follows:
--Climate is still local
--Ocean currents are melting, therefore cooling down islands and coastal areas
--Greenhouse gases still warm the earth

--I agree that climate is local and varies according to many different factors. There is another point that interests me in your statement. Namely, your statement that "Not all regions are expected to warm." This, by our preestablished definition of global warming from round one, basically says that there is no global warming trend.
--I do not agree that any ocean currents are melting or that such a phenomenon can even occur and request my opponent's source for this fact.
--There is no question that greenhouse gases warm the earth. However, as I have said, CO2 levels have grown only 70 ppm in the past 50 years. I would like to clarify to my opponent and to the voters that that represents a grand total of two-thousandths of a percentage point of the atmosphere, from 0.000054% to 0.000242%(http://www.esrl.noaa.gov......). My opponent claims that these radical changes will cost the world billions of dollars and bring down everyone's IQ.

"2)Yes the earth has gone through warming and cooling periods before in the past..."
"3) As I mentioned in number 1. Some areas are expected to cool due to the melting of ice cooling ocean currents. The earth as a whole... http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov...;

I will take this to mean that any previous changes in the atmosphere and its temperature are not due to human activity, but today's are. The second statement, although being quite clear, is unfortunately factually wrong.

I will attempt to dispose of both of these points at once. According to (www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php?extend.24) and (http://newsbusters.org...), the top ten hottest years were changed in 2007. Here are four of them: 1934, 1931, 1938, and 1939. Only three of the top ten are since 1998 (1998, 2006, and 1999) .
          • Only 4 of the top 10 warmest years occurred in the past 10 years (1998, 1999, 2006)
          • Out of the top 10 warmest years half occurred before 1940
          • The years 2000, 2002, 2003 and 2004 were cooler than the year 1900
          • 1996, just two years before what Al Gore called the hottest year in the history of the planet, was actually cooler than average.
          • 1921 was the third warmest year in recorded history (behind 1934 and 1998).

That considered, it is easy to see that humans and CO2 are not reliable causes of regional warming (as you yourself acknowledged, global warming does not exist) during the period of cooling from 1940-80, CO2 levels were still rising, as was industry. Just look at your sources. Clearly, CO2 does not affect temperature as much as you state.


U.S. Temperature Record 1880-2000
This is a graph located at http://ossfoundation.us...;(use the link to see the image if the image doesn't work) which shows an increase of 1/3 of a degree celsius over the course of 120 years. The US is one of the most rigourously monitered countries. The US temperatures, one of the most reliable in the world, show an increase of 1/3 of a degree over the past 120 years and a downward curve since 1934.

"4)Total ice volume in the articcs has been steadily decreasing for decades now..."

Pretty self explanatory. To counter this, I will simply re-post a fact I have already presented.
          • "The article found at http://www.daycreek.com... proves that the earth was warmer than it is today during the last four interglacials, dating back 420,000 years.
          • http://journals.ametsoc.org......(2000) references a slight cooling trend over the past 20 years, according to a consensus between satellite and ground stations.
          • Ian Joughin and Slawek Tulaczyk used "ice-flow velocity measurements... find strong evidence for ice-sheet growth (+26.8 gigatons per year)." Their findings can be found at http://www.sciencemag.org.......
          • "Climate models generally predict amplified warming in polar regions as observed in Antarctica’speninsula region over the second half of the 20th century. Although previous reports suggest slight recent continental warming ,our spatial analysis of Antarctic meteorological data demonstrates a net cooling on the Antarctic continent between 1966 and 2000...The McMurdo Dry Valleys have cooled by 0.7 8C per decade between 1986 and 2000, with similar pronounced seasonal trends." http://atoc.colorado.edu......

I would like my opponent to note the second to last point which states that overall Antarctic ice sheets are growing at a rate of over 26.8 gigatons per year. That's over 59,080,000,000,000 pounds a year.

"5)A climate model set up in the mid 70's has accurately predicted... ."

"The forcings that drive long-term climate change are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change. " (http://www.pnas.org...)

"6)My opponent is not correct. If every country lowered greenhouse gas emissions to 5% below 1990 levels then that effect alone would..."

Your sources please.

"7)My opponent claims that deforestation is not contributing to global warming..."

Although my opponent is correct in saying that I underestimated the effect of deforestation, according to http://www.ecology.com... full 80% of atmospheric oxygen is produced by marine algae.

"9)Sea levels have been steady rising for the past 130 years. http://upload.wikimedia.org...;

So they have. They were also rising at the exact same rate for 6000 years, and even faster than that beginning 15000 years ago. There is no data before that. (http://www.grida.no......) If you are going to tie sea levels to global warming, you may as well claim rapid warming has been going on for 15000 years, completely eliminating any idea of "sudden dire threat." If we haven't suffered yet for 15000 years, there must be no urgency in the matter. For more details, check the website and the previous round, in which I have already made this argument. Also, wikimedia isn't the most reliable source.

Now, the increases in extreme weather that you mentioned is very similar to the El Nino event that occurs every four years. A study was done after the 1998 El Nino (http://journals.ametsoc.org...) which, if you look in the abstract, states that the estimated net direct benefits were worth something like $15,000,000,000 dollars. ($4 billion losses and $19 billion benefits)

"When you include all the negative health/environmental effects..."
The beaurocracy of the coal/oil/gas industries aren't stupid. If alternative energy was cheaper, they would use it and produce energy that way.

"13)Other effects of climate change is an increase in tornadoes..."

Sources, please.

Conclusion

Kyoto and Gl. Warm. Theory Should be Abandoned Unless Impact on Environment is Objectively Proven

In light of these facts, it is clear that global warming is, as you stated, not at all a global phenomenon. Global warming would save just the american people up to $15 billion a season, which is more than the combined GDP of just under 50 of the world's poorest countries combined. I have also demonstrated that if the world sea levels are proportional to atmospheric temperature, then Kyoto is unnecessary and we are scrambling to find suddendly neccessary solutions to an at least 15000 year old problem. Also in view of the fact that antarctic ice shelves are not melting, and with this evidence gone we must conclude that global warming does not exist and Kyoto is an unnecessary waste of resources. As such, this data must be looked at again and both Kyoto and the Global Warming Theory be revised.
Looking forward to your response,
and981228


Willoweed

Con

1)--There is a Global warming trend, the Global in its whole is warming and has been so for decades.

--You might not agree but the fact remains that melting ice causes cold water to flood into certain ocean currents which results in lower temperatures for some areas.

--Carbon concentrations have increased by around 23% since 1960 meaning Carbon's greenhouse gass effect alone has increased by 23%. Other green house gasses have also contributed.

2)
3)--Actually the actual data show that the top 10 hottest years have occurred since 1998. You're source which is from anti-global warming people uses MY sources as sources, the only thing is that your sources lie about what my sources actually say.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov...
http://data.giss.nasa.gov...

----Global cooling didn't actually occur it was a stagnation of earths warming trend for a decade or two. This was because sun activity was reaching a record low (in the 90's it was normal and currently it is low), and because humans were emitting chemicals that cause the earth to cool. These chemicals had very bad health effects and governments mandated a reduction in there remittance.

4)Ice levels being higher half a million years ago has nothing to do with ice levels retreating steadily for the past several decades.
5)The fact remands that a climate model made in 1975 accurately predicted temperatures changes. Current models which have 35 years more data and scientific research are much better.
6)My sources? The fact remands that greenhouse gasses heat the earth, lowering them would therefore cause the earth to cool. You even admitted it in your post.
7)Oxygen has nothing to do with the fact that my opponent was wrong when he said deforestation had nothing to do with climate change/global warming.
8)…
9)My opponent is making the mistake in that he thinks that because natural effects can change the climate that humans can't. Current warming trends are solely due to human activity. Science has already proved it regardless of the fact that people ignore it.
10) http://www.spc.noaa.gov...
Number of tornadoes has increased by 30% due to global warming.
Tornadoes are formed when hot air collides with cold air.
Usually when the hot air is below the cold air, when the hot air rises and the cold air falls it causes tornadoes to form.

http://www.boston.com...
^Since 1986 wildfires have increased by 400%, and acres burned has increased by 650%.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
^Global Warming has increased the odds of heat waves by 6 times.

http://www.earthend-newbeginning.com...
^In America winter storms severity and frequency has increased by 24%
^Climate change results in worse winter weather because warmer temperatures allow the air to hold more moisture meaning more snow; also the melting of ice in the north pole causes the ocean current to cool the north east.
http://www.independent.co.uk...
http://www.sciencenews.org...
^Since warmer weather and a more Carbon filled atmosphere increase grasshopper mating grasshopper habitat and populations have expanded. This results in more destruction of crops from these insects. This is because grasshoppers bread faster and longer in warmer weather.

http://www.sciencenews.org...
1^CO2 emissions killing off fish/water life due to CO2 making bodies of water more acidic. This is because CO2 + H2O ====> H2CO3
^
http://thinkprogress.org...
^Carbon emissions are responsible for a 20% fall in oyster production
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
^Global warming responsible for increase in mosquito habitat and populations which has increased malaria and other diseases killing people and increasing health care costs. This is because mosquitos thrive in warmer weather
11)Health effects of greenhouse gas emissions.
http://scienceblog.com...
^Air pollution from cars, and factories linked to learning/memory problems and depression.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...
^Rising CO2 levels responsible for increase in hay fever.

Greenhouse gases cause increase in lung diseases
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...

http://www.sciencenews.org...
http://uk.reuters.com...
^Air pollution such as exhaust from cars and coal plants increases diabetes. Mice that inhaled real world concentration were more likely to have cardiovascular disease and have diabetes symptoms.
^
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
^Fine-particle pollution, or soot in the air increases obesity. Exposure to fine-particle air pollution early in life increases obesity rates even if you eat a normal healthy diet. Fine-particle air pollution also increases the chance of having unhealthy blood sugar levels. It does this by increasing inflammation of cells, which when inflammation occurs in fat cells in makes them retain more fat.
****air pollution (soot/fine-particle) increases obesity and diabetes

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
^Air pollution such as soot and smoke from power plants and automobiles can cause cardiovascular disease. Air pollutants such as soot and smoke below standards set by the EPA causes arteries to be 50% more blocked by plaque. Exposure to the air pollution also increased bad cholesterol levels, and blood pressure.
*****Air pollution (soot/smoke from cars/power plants) increases cardiovascular disease by 50%

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
^Air pollution such as the pollution from cars, including greenhouse gasses increases the chance of having breast cancer. Women living in the most air polluted areas are twice as likely to develop breast cancer then women living in the least polluted areas.
Pollutants include NO2.
****Air pollution (greenhouse gasses car exhaust) increases risk of breast cancer by 200%

http://scienceblog.com...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com...
^--Children exposed to above median levels of hydrocarbons (pollutants that are released into the air by the burning of fossil fuels) had lower IQ'es of 4.5 points.
****Children exposed to air pollution (hydrocarbons/fossil fuels) had a lower IQ, of 4.5 points.

http://www.naturalnews.com...
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
^Living near a freeway is associated with an increased risk of having children with autism.
Children born from mothers living near freeways are twice as likely to have an autism disorder.
Also exposure to mercury and other pollutants increase the risk of autism by 50%

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
^Mice exposed to vehicle pollution suffer brain damage.

12)Just to repeat research shows that the cost of energy such as oil and coal which causes lots of greenhouse gas emission when including environmental and health effects is TWO times large then the cost of solar and wind.
Debate Round No. 2
ant981228

Pro

ant981228 forfeited this round.
Willoweed

Con

My opponent fortified.
Debate Round No. 3
ant981228

Pro

ant981228 forfeited this round.
Willoweed

Con

Willoweed forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ant981228 5 years ago
ant981228
My formatting isn't working very nicely. The sizes are all different.
Posted by ant981228 5 years ago
ant981228
Good luck, Willoweed!
No votes have been placed for this debate.