The Instigator
megha123
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
baseballkid
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

global warming is cause by humans

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 8 votes the winner is...
baseballkid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/5/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,900 times Debate No: 26912
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (8)

 

megha123

Pro

Scientists have concluded that most of the observed warming is very likely due to the burning of coal, oil, and gas. This conclusion is based on a detailed understanding of the atmospheric greenhouse effect and how human activities have been tweaking it. At the same time, other reasonable explanations, most notably changes in the Sun, have been ruled out.

The atmospheric greenhouse effect naturally keeps our planet warm enough to be livable. Sunlight passes through the atmosphere. Light-colored surfaces, such as clouds or ice caps, radiate some heat back into space. But most of the incoming heat warms the planet's surface. The Earth then radiates some heat back into the atmosphere. Some of that heat is trapped by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide (CO2). Human activity--such as burning fossil fuels--causes more greenhouse gases to build up in the atmosphere. As the atmosphere "thickens" with more greenhouse gases, more heat is held in. Fossil fuels such as oil, coal and natural gas are high in carbon and, when burned, produce major amounts of carbon dioxide or CO2. A single gallon of gasoline, when burned, puts 19 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
baseballkid

Con

(1)As you never provide proof that your claims are true all of what you said is invalid. You never even proved that global warming is a real thing.(2) I use my source to prove that it is a hoax. You have not proved at all how the earth is warming and I have proof stating exactly the opposite.

(1)http://grist.org...
(2)http://www.forbes.com...
Debate Round No. 1
megha123

Pro

first of all let me proof that global warming is happening .
The 10 indicators are:

Land surface air temperature as measured by weather stations. You know all those skeptic arguments about how the temperature record is biased by the urban heat island effect, badly-sited weather stations, dropped stations, and so on? This is the only indicator which suffers from all those problems. So if you"re arguing with somebody who tries to frame the discussion as being about land surface air temperature, just remind them about the other nine indicators.
Sea surface temperature. As with land temperatures, the longest record goes back to 1850 and the last decade is warmest.
Air temperature over the oceans.
Lower troposphere temperature as measured by satellites for around 50 years. By any of these measures, the 2000s was the warmest decade and each of the last three decades has been much warmer than the previous one.
Ocean heat content, for which records go back over half a century. More than 90% of the extra heat from global warming is going into the oceans " contributing to a rise in"
Sea level. Tide gauge records go back to 1870, and sea level has risen at an accelerating rate.
Specific humidity, which has risen in tandem with temperatures.
Glaciers. 2009 was the 19th consecutive year in which there was a net loss of ice from glaciers worldwide.
Northern Hemisphere snow cover, which has also decreased in recent decades.
Perhaps the most dramatic change of all has been in Arctic sea ice. Satellite measurements are available back to 1979 and reliable shipping records back to 1953. September sea ice extent has shrunk by 35% since 1979.
Science isn"t like a house of cards, in that removing one line of evidence (eg. land surface air temperature) wouldn"t cause the whole edifice of anthropogenic global warming to collapse. Rather, "land surface warming" is one of more than ten bricks supporting "global warming"; and with global warming established, there is a whole other set of bricks supporting "anthropogenic global warming". To undermine these conclusions, you"d need to remove most or all of the bricks supporting them " but as the evidence continues to pile up, that is becoming less and less likely.

now global warming is caused by humans , proofs are -
1.Humans are currently emitting around 30 billion tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (CDIAC). Of course, it could be coincidence that CO2 levels are rising so sharply at the same time so let"s look at more evidence that we"re responsible for the rise in CO2 levels.
When we measure the type of carbon accumulating in the atmosphere, we observe more of the type of carbon that comes from fossil fuels (Manning 2006).
This is corroborated by measurements of oxygen in the atmosphere. Oxygen levels are falling in line with the amount of carbon dioxide rising, just as you"d expect from fossil fuel burning which takes oxygen out of the air to create carbon dioxide (Manning 2006).
Further independent evidence that humans are raising CO2 levels comes from measurements of carbon found in coral records going back several centuries. These find a recent sharp rise in the type of carbon that comes from fossil fuels (Pelejero 2005).
So we know humans are raising CO2 levels. What"s the effect? Satellites measure less heat escaping out to space, at the particular wavelengths that CO2 absorbs heat, thus finding "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth"s greenhouse effect". (Harries 2001, Griggs 2004, Chen 2007).
If less heat is escaping to space, where is it going? Back to the Earth"s surface. Surface measurements confirm this, observing more downward infrared radiation (Philipona 2004,Wang 2009). A closer look at the downward radiation finds more heat returning at CO2 wavelengths, leading to the conclusion that "this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming." (Evans 2006).
If an increased greenhouse effect is causing global warming, we should see certain patterns in the warming. For example, the planet should warm faster at night than during the day. This is indeed being observed (Braganza 2004, Alexander 2006).
Another distinctive pattern of greenhouse warming is cooling in the upper atmosphere, otherwise known as the stratosphere. This is exactly what"s happening (Jones 2003).
With the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) warming and the upper atmosphere (the stratosphere) cooling, another consequence is the boundary between the troposphere and stratosphere, otherwise known as the tropopause, should rise as a consequence of greenhouse warming. This has been observed (Santer 2003).
An even higher layer of the atmosphere, the ionosphere, is expected to cool and contract in response to greenhouse warming. This has been observed by satellites (La"tovi?ka 2006).
baseballkid

Con

My opponent has many links that say that the Global heating of the earth is due to human activity.(1) If this is so why is mars heating up as well?(2) My opponent has proved that the earth is warming but has failed to prove that it is the humans fault. He claims that it is the increase of carbon dioxide. If this is so then why are Neptune, Mars, and Pluto heating up as well. (3)(4) Because of this we can conclude that global warming is because of other matters in our solar system and not carbon dioxide like my opponent has been saying.

(1)http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
(2)http://www.livescience.com...
(3)http://wattsupwiththat.com...
(4)http://web.mit.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by baseballkid 4 years ago
baseballkid
Yup. The guy below me said it well.
Posted by dlu2012 4 years ago
dlu2012
This was a very bad debate. The pro copied his whole entire speech. The con did not debate. Just countered. Basically all the con had to do is say plagiarized in round one and won the whole thing then.
Posted by baseballkid 4 years ago
baseballkid
My opponent apparently plagiarized his entire debate giving me the win.
Posted by baseballkid 4 years ago
baseballkid
I would say good debate but i got owned. My opponent knew way more about the topic.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by yuiru 4 years ago
yuiru
megha123baseballkidTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Funk Con! "As you never provide proof that your claims are true all of what you said is invalid." Is invalid and not true! unsound =/= invalid. Cons arguments are just generally weak. Con's last argument was invalid and he basically relied completely on sources without giving a real argument. Basically con's argument: 1: Why is mars heating up? 2: Pro failed to prove global warming is caused by humans. Why are Neptune, Mars, and Pluto heating up as well? Conclusion: therefore global warming is caused by "other matters in the solar system". -This does not follow. EDIT: Aw well... apparently pro plagiarism-ed! Therefore no one wins convincing arguments since none were made by either side.
Vote Placed by baggins 4 years ago
baggins
megha123baseballkidTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con does not deserve this win, yet he wins due to Pro's plagiarism.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
megha123baseballkidTied
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: plagiarism
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
megha123baseballkidTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Nobody deserves to win this, but at least Con didn't plagiarize.
Vote Placed by Muted 4 years ago
Muted
megha123baseballkidTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarizing
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
megha123baseballkidTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro plagiarized his whole argument: http://www.skepticalscience.com/evidence-for-global-warming.htm, con therefore wins as I don't count plagiarism in my vote as an argument. Second plagiarism for second half: http://www.skepticalscience.com/10-Indicators-of-a-Human-Fingerprint-on-Climate-Change.html Really? I know the sources on these issues, I will catch you.
Vote Placed by RationalMadman 4 years ago
RationalMadman
megha123baseballkidTied
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:42 
Reasons for voting decision: That was such a sh*t debate on con's part. He just gave sources. No debating at all.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
megha123baseballkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: "My opponent has proved that the earth is warming but has failed to prove that it is the humans fault. " What! Pro's R2 argument was all about how it's human's fault. This needed to be more than 2 rounds. Con doesn't address any arguments and However Pro answered Con's argument.