The Instigator
sadolite
Pro (for)
Winning
181 Points
The Contender
tootiefruteh
Con (against)
Losing
94 Points

Prove to me global warming is caused by man by proving the evidence I provided is flawed/incorrect

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
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: 3/6/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,626 times Debate No: 3111
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (147)
Votes (56)

 

sadolite

Pro

I am going to submit evidence that global warming may not be caused by man and most if not all of that evidence will summarily be dismissed do to non scientific reasons such as it is junk science or it is bought and paid for by some oil company, it is political propaganda by deniers or the scientists who are submitting the evidence have some ax to grind or they don't meet some higher learning qualification. I seriously doubt any of it will be analyzed or even compared to any evidence for global warming being caused by man. More than likely I will be sent to links justifying the pro position and none of my evidence will be addressed. Instead the focus will be shifted from my evidence and an attempt will be made to shift the burden of proof on me and I will have to prove their position. This will not happen in this debate. The burden of proof is on the challenger to prove why my evidence is invalid "SCIENTIFICALY", not politically or in any other manner that is not scientific. The sources I use are irrelevant, if it can be proved wrong with a high degree of conclusiveness using comparative scientific data from other sources it should be very easy for you to do. I will not dismiss your sources as I approach any evidence or theories on this subject as valid until I can compare the data and see if it is consistent, biased or completely incorrect based on other available data from both sides of the argument. If you are not willing to except the terms of this debate don't accept the challenge. If you attempt to dismiss any of my sources based on anything other than scientific reasons I will immediately end the debate because it will become a complete waste of my time. I am on this site to be educated on the subject both pro and con based on the scientific evidence from both sides of the argument. I do not care if I win or lose this debate. I am almost positive but not completely positive that when this debate is over nothing will be proved to any conclusive degree that man is more likely than not to be the cause of global warming based on the evidence available from both sides.
Being able to determine an average global temperature must be accurate in order to determine if the average global temperature is warming or cooling. Researchers in this link say it is thermodynamically and mathematically impossible to put a single number on the average temperature of the earth. Furthermore there are several different ways to figure averages and depending on which method you use you will get completely different results. So from this data it is impossible to tell if the average global temperature is rising without being biased towards one method of determining average global temperature. And if you do use a method that is biased you have to leave out the fact that it is mathematically and thermodynamically impossible to figure an average global temperature even when you use that biased method.
http://www.sciencedaily.com...
I have searched for other sources and could find none that dispute this claim. Good luck to you in your searches. You will find lots of sites claiming average temps but from the data I have read they are more likely than not to be flawed and inaccurate representations if indeed it is impossible to figure an average global temp. What I ask for in this link is a similar link that says it is not impossible to figure average global temps using mathematics and thermodynamics and that those figures are more likely to be accurate than not. This should be very easy to prove in my opinion because a great deal of the evidence for the pro side is based on the theory that average global temps are rising.

(GCM's ) General Circulation Models: They attempt to simulate or predict future climate conditions. These have been proven to be completely inaccurate and flawed at predicting climate changes in the future because the data that is initially input to generate the simulation is based on guesses and assumptions on how the climate works and scientists all agree that they are not even close to knowing how it works with any degree of accuracy. It is further stated that GCM's are unsuitable and to inaccurate for the basis of setting public policy with regard to Global warming
http://www.heartland.org...
http://www.worldclimatereport.com...
http://www.globalwarming.org...
http://www.giss.nasa.gov...
There are hundreds of links that discuss GCM's and virtually all of them admit to guessing or using arbitrary numbers based on the limited knowledge that is available on how the earth's climate works. My research indicates that GCM's are virtually worthless indicators of future global conditions.
!7,000 Scientists disagree that Co2 is the main cause of global warming and that we are still recovering from a small ice age and have provided an extensive report as to why they think this is so based on all available data with regard to the earth's climate. This report is extremely detailed and just as convincing as the pro side. Why is everything in this report not valid when used as evidence that would suggest global warming is not caused by man?
http://www.oism.org...
I want to know the truth about this subject. But for every link that says global warming is caused by man I can find one that is equally scientific if not more based on science that it isn't.
I wish my opponent luck, this will be a very hard for you because the burden of proof is on you should you accept this debate. Don't take this debate if you are not going to use science to prove my links wrong and make no attempt to shift the burden of proof on me. You are trying to convince me that global warming is caused by man by man. If you can prove that the evidence that I have provided is flawed or incorrect with a reasonable degree of conclusiveness I will change my mind.
tootiefruteh

Con

tootiefruteh forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
sadolite

Pro

I don't need to make a rebuttal under the terms of this debate as none of my evidence was addressed. The burden of proof is not on me.
tootiefruteh

Con

tootiefruteh forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
sadolite

Pro

I don't need to make a rebuttal under the terms of this debate as none of my evidence was addressed. The burden of proof is not on me.
tootiefruteh

Con

tootiefruteh forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
147 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by sadolite 4 years ago
sadolite
"I am curious what was the score before our disagreement" EH, who cares.
Posted by tmhustler 4 years ago
tmhustler
Yes it is me tmhustler me and my 20 cell numbers will get you

by the way I have been on this site for 2 months and you were vote bombed long be for I got here.

I am curious what was the score before our disagreement
Posted by Rob1Billion 4 years ago
Rob1Billion
there's a few extra votes for you pro...
Posted by Rob1Billion 4 years ago
Rob1Billion
yeah this is quite ridiculous that con didn't even write one character in the debate yet he has garnered 92 votes!
Posted by sadolite 4 years ago
sadolite
Look! I am being vote bombed again I am about to loose this debate again. Even if somone disagrees with my vote at least I am man enough to let them know who I am and let them know why I voted against them. Note: my opponet forfeited every round yet still is one vote away from winning.

I suspect "tmhustler" is a vote bomber
Posted by mongoose 5 years ago
mongoose
Wait... so before you voted, this was a win for CON???
Posted by wjmelements 5 years ago
wjmelements
Defaulted PRO due to forfeits.
Posted by Bobki52 5 years ago
Bobki52
I hear that. I'm engaged in a "dialog" with about five of them on another site. AGW is a religion. Their proof seems to boil down to 1) the 1975-2000 timeframe during which CO2 and temperatures tracked together 2) climate models, and 3) the idea that there is a tipping point that we are about to reach. None of course is proof of anything. Correlation does not prove causation, the models are admittedly an ineffective effort to predict the behavior of a system that we understand poorly, and the notion of a tipping point is unproven conjecture. But it's all they have, so they ride these points relentlessly - along with the claim that the debate is over. They cannot really explain the Ordovician Ice Age, the higher temperatures during the pervious interglacials, the higher temperatures during the Holocene, the fact that the current warm period fits in perfectly with last few warming/cooling cycles, the 1940-1975 temperature declines, the current temperature declines, the fact that the troposphere is not warming as predicted, or the missing CO2 hotspot... And they refuse to acknowledge the possibility that the billions of dollars that the UN and other governments are spending might possibly influence AGW studies. In the face of no empirical proof of AGW, their faith remains unshaken. It's a religion, and they want to believe. Simply amazing.
Posted by sadolite 5 years ago
sadolite
It isn't a debate , It's a vote bombing site for global warming idiots. As you can see the bias is extreme. I am sure if anyone read the debate they could not have possibly voted for my opponent as he forfeited every round. This just goes to show that the global warming crowd is in so deep that it would be to embarrassing for them to admit they are wrong. Even if you put undeniable evidence they would still hold their ground. And of course you will not ever see a prime time debate among scientists on this issue as all of the news media has been hood winked and would also look like complete idiots for towing the politically correct line proving they are no longer news agencies but political mouth pieces for the left and the global warming wishers. This is about wealth redistribution on a global scale has nothing what so ever to do with "SAVING THE PLANET" Global warming is the excuse to justify the means and the end. I will have a good laugh at the news medias expense when they become completely irrelevant and a worthless institution. Of course they will blame their critics but the blame can only be their own demise for not being watch dogs of govt instead of political activists for the Democratic party. The very party that they slobber over will be the ones to sensor them if they even think of not towing the line and actually go on a fact finding mission as the news used to do.
Posted by Bobki52 5 years ago
Bobki52
I looks like I am way too late to comment on this debate. Is anyone still paying attention to it?
56 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 31 through 40 records.
Vote Placed by CP 5 years ago
CP
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 Sweatingjojo 5 years ago
Sweatingjojo
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 Rezzealaux 5 years ago
Rezzealaux
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 Zerosmelt 5 years ago
Zerosmelt
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 
Vote Placed by Biowza 6 years ago
Biowza
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 
Vote Placed by InquireTruth 6 years ago
InquireTruth
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 basketballbeast7 6 years ago
basketballbeast7
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 
Vote Placed by debate12345 6 years ago
debate12345
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 
Vote Placed by draxxt 6 years ago
draxxt
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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 believer_720 6 years ago
believer_720
sadolitetootiefrutehTied
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