The Instigator
epidexipteryx
Pro (for)
The Contender
MysteriumRevelatum
Con (against)

Man is not responsible for the recent warming trends

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
MysteriumRevelatum has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/28/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 408 times Debate No: 95046
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

epidexipteryx

Pro

Outline:
R1: Acceptance
R2: Arguments (no rebuttals)
R3: Rebuttals (no new arguments, you can strengthen your argument)

I am debating that man is not the cause of recent significant warming. I am not arguing that the world isn't warming.

Also, please don't cite any consensus or use the argument that "97% of scientists agree" because I don't care what other scientists think. This is a debate between you and me, not me and the random scientist you are citing.

If you have any questions put them in the comments, I will be happy to answer them.

Please don't put arguments in the comments, if you forget to post anything just ask in the comments if you can post it as part of your next argument and I will probably say yes.

One last thing, try to summarize your arguments because I don't want to end up reading an essay.
MysteriumRevelatum

Con

I will accept this debate, and assume the Con position that man is the cause of recent significant warming.

I look forward to debating.
Debate Round No. 1
epidexipteryx

Pro

There is much to discuss on this subject so I will try to keep my arguments to a minimum:

Perhaps the most convincing claim I have found disproving man made Global Warming is the absence of a troposphere hotspot and of any overall atmospheric warming in the last 20 years. If Co2 has caused the recent warming trends, then why is there no hotspot. In addition to this, why is the atmosphere not warming? By the IPCC's climate theory, the atmosphere was supposed to warm first yet this is not what is happening.
No atmospheric warming: http://4.bp.blogspot.com...
No hotspot: https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...

Another claim disproving Co2 driven climate change is that, in the past, Co2 has no correlation to temperature whatsoever.
No correlation: http://www.paulmacrae.com...

More evidence against man made climate change is that almost all the computer models have been wrong. This suggests there is something fundamentally wrong with the models.
Computer Models 1: https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...
Computer Models 2: http://c3headlines.typepad.com...

Another flaw in climate theory is that, in the 1940s-1970s, temperature decreased despite the Co2 emmisions increasing dramatically.
Temp decrease: http://www.ofcomswindlecomplaint.net...
Co2 rise: http://static.skepticalscience.com...

Finally, even in the past hundred thousand years, Co2 has lagged temperature, not the other way around. In the past Co2 has never caused temperature rise.
Lag: http://www.stallinga.org...
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by epidexipteryx 5 months ago
epidexipteryx
My opponents final "argument" says, "To argue that global warming is not human-caused at this point, is to argue against all sane scientific knowledge and reasoning, and the deductions of the leading climate scientists and the overwhelming majority of scientists across all fields."

I put the word argument in parenthesis because this claim presents no data explaining how man made global warming is real. All it says is that scientists agree the man made climate change is real. There are again, many problems with this statement.

1. Scientists are forced to publish data that is in favor of man made global warming because if they don't then they will be ridiculed and accused of being funded by the fossil fuel companies. (The government also spends 4 billion dollars a year funding man made climate change grants and other events so you get money if you believe in man made climate change) This creates a huge bias among scientific papers because if you don't research in favor of man made global warming it is harder to get money and you are expelled from the scientific community.

2. Many scientists disagree with man made climate change, they just don't speak out and are thought to believe in it.
https://en.wikipedia.org...

I also suggest that you watch this movie:
https://www.youtube.com...
I know it is long but it make pretty good claims and somewhere in it it discusses the manipulation of consensus the IPCC does when making its claim that 2500 of the worlds top scientists agree that climate change is caused by man.
Here is another video about the 97% consensus:
https://www.youtube.com...

Thank you for reading my arguments, good luck with your rebuttals
Posted by epidexipteryx 5 months ago
epidexipteryx
My opponents final argument to prove that man made climate change is real is to quote the IPCC. The quote says,
"It is a greater than a 90 percent certainty that emissions of heat-trapping gases from human activities have caused 'most of the observed increase in global averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century'."
This is wrong for, again, many different reasons.
1. If the IPCC actually understood how much warming was due to Co2, then why are all of their models wrong?
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...
http://c3headlines.typepad.com...
All of the IPCC's climate models are wrong because they predict to much heat. This suggests there is something fundamentally wrong with how the models interpret Co2 caused heating because the one thing kept constant in all the models is that Co2 is a main climate driver.

2. The IPCC forgets to mention that there was an El Nino spike in the 1980s which throws off data (making it look like the spike was due to Co2)
https://climatechangeskeptic.files.wordpress.com...
http://www.bitsofscience.org...

3. The IPCC also forgets to say that there has been no significant atmospheric warming in the past 20 years
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com...
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...

I have now explained only 3 ways the IPCC manipulates data and disproves their own theory. All of these things should indicate that the IPCC has no idea what they are doing and that man made climate change is false
Continued on next comment .
Posted by epidexipteryx 5 months ago
epidexipteryx
Here is the quote my opponent made for easier reference, "Well, almost in parallel, as the Earth's global temperature has been steadily rising, so too have the levels of carbon dioxide, a known greenhouse gas. And human activity, in particular deforestation and the burning of coal, natural gas, oil, etc., is to blame for this rise in global temperature."

As you can see based on the weather balloon data (provided below), there is no hotspot. This should disprove man made climate change on its own
3. Another fact to disprove a Co2 driven climate is that, if Co2 did amplify itself as the IPCC says, then you would expect the ocean to become abnormally basic every few thousand years. This is because, if Co2 did use water vapor amplification, the warming caused by this amplification would only stop once there is no more Co2 in the oceans. This would cause the oceans pH to be very basic as we know doesn't happen.
https://www.manicore.com...

I have now shown that, Co2 has never caused amplification in the past, the predicted tropospheric hotspot that would have been caused by Co2 induced warming is absent, and that my opponent has not showed any causation between temperature and Co2.

I could list more claims to debut your arguments but it would take to long so I will move on (in the next comment, I hate only having 2000 characters to write with :( ).
Posted by epidexipteryx 5 months ago
epidexipteryx
In my opponents paragraph, they first discuss the greenhouse effect. They even say that I probably agree with it. These are both true, I know about the greenhouse effect and agree it happens.

My opponent then proceeds to say, "The most common greenhouse gas is, of course, carbon dioxide" but this is just untrue. Water Vapor is by far the most greenhouse gas and much much stronger then Co2.
https://www.acs.org...

Before my next argument, I would like to make something clear. If I believe in the greenhouse effect, then why do I think Co2 doesn't effect temperature? Well this is because of a system in our climate called feedback. A feedback is an effect of Co2 in the atmosphere that either amplifies or dampens its warming effect. I feel that Co2s warming effects is dampened by the climate instead of amplified. Others feel that is is amplified.

Next my opponent says, "Well, almost in parallel, as the Earth's global temperature has been steadily rising, so too have the levels of carbon dioxide, a known greenhouse gas. And human activity, in particular deforestation and the burning of coal, natural gas, oil, etc., is to blame for this rise in global temperature."
There are many ways I can respond to this so I will do it in numbered form:
1. Yes, the Earths temperature and Co2 have been rising together but this is only a correlation. This does not prove any causation between the two because it does not show how Co2 warming amplifies itself.
2. Predicted by the IPCC, there was supposed to be a very prominent hotspot in temperature in the mid to upper troposphere due to greenhouse gas emission. If this troposphere had appeared, it would have been considered proof of man made climate change. Here is the data collected from millions of weather balloons compared to the hotspot prediction:
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...
Continued on next comment -
Posted by epidexipteryx 5 months ago
epidexipteryx
I will post my rebuttals in the comments
Posted by MysteriumRevelatum 5 months ago
MysteriumRevelatum
Alright, sounds good.
Posted by epidexipteryx 5 months ago
epidexipteryx
Thx for posting your argument in the comments but my computer and Ipad are both glitching and they wont let me post my arguments. If it doesn't let me post tomorrow I will put my rebuttals in the comments.
Posted by MysteriumRevelatum 5 months ago
MysteriumRevelatum
The scientific evidence for global warming being caused by humans is overwhelming. In short, global warming is caused by an expansion of what's commonly called "the greenhouse effect" (I'm sure even Pro would concede this point). The greenhouse effect is the warming of the Earth, caused by heat which is trapped in the atmosphere. And the trapping of this heat is caused by what are known as greenhouse gases (Again, I'm sure even Pro would concede these as facts). The most common greenhouse gas is, of course, carbon dioxide (CO2), but there are many others such as nitrous oxide, water vapour, and methane. [1]
So, how do we know that this global warming and expansion of the greenhouse effect is human-caused?
Well, almost in parallel, as the Earth's global temperature has been steadily rising, so too have the levels of carbon dioxide, a known greenhouse gas. And human activity, in particular deforestation and the burning of coal, natural gas, oil, etc., is to blame for this rise in global temperature. The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states: "It is a greater than a 90 percent certainty that emissions of heat-trapping gases from human activities have caused 'most of the observed increase in globall averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century'." [2]
To argue that global warming is not human-caused at this point, is to argue against all sane scientific knowledge and reasoning, and the deductions of the leading climate scientists and the overwhelming majority of scientists across all fields.
In summary, this simple relation between global temperature increase and rising human CO2 emissions forms the basis of the idea that humans indeed are the cause of global warming. [3]

1- http://climate.nasa.gov...
2- http://www.ucsusa.org...
3- https://www.nwf.org...
Posted by MysteriumRevelatum 5 months ago
MysteriumRevelatum
I'm going to go ahead and post my Round 2 argument, so there's at least something for you to rebut. Sorry about this.
Posted by MysteriumRevelatum 5 months ago
MysteriumRevelatum
I can post it in the comment, so there is something for you to rebut.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.