Pro and con for global warming. Debate!?

Question

In our debate class were having an exam on a debate of global warming. I am po global warming, which means i do believe glo0bal warmign exists. I have been putting os much effort into this but i can seem to find ALL the data i need. We are garunteed to win if we can apply it to the consitution on cdv's. so can anybody help me. Also, could i have facts that you think are the best to prove there is global warming. Also if you dont believe in global warmign could you answer this and tell me why?

Answer 1

There is no cons. Global warming is a fake. I am anti-global warming. But you may use these opposites to try to find facts against it.

Polar bears may die out but the black bear population rises.

Plants grow better with HIGHER amounts of CO2. Crop yield will be better, more food produced, healthier people will be on this earth, with longer lifespans.

Disease will not spread and major outbreaks will not happen.

New lands such as the poles and Siberia will be more suitable for living.

The cycle of global warming is NATURAL, as opposed to manmade.

Most of the warming took place in the 1940's, which is BEFORE the industrial revolution. meaning humans had no effect on it. Natural Cycles have been found with no human effect. + We're coming out of an Ice Age now. ("Little Ice Age")

Flooding will be minimal. Rainfall will increase a little, again helping grow better crops and reduce forest fires. Only places where temperature is really effected is the poles. Meaning, places along the equator may not warm at all. Remember it's an AVERAGE.

+ These averages are unreliable due to the "Urban Heat Island Effect"

---------

Over 19,000 Scientists signed the "Oregon Treaty" which states that global warming is a hoax. The founder of the Weather Channel declines global warming is real. Many US Senators also do not believe it, like Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe.

Answer 2

Global warming is not caused by humans. The global warming theory indicates that greenhouse gases emitted by humans (mainly CO2) have been causing heat to be captured on it's way from the surface to outer space. This heat trapping effect based on a theory called radiative transfer, predicts the middle troposphere in the tropics to heat up faster than any other part of the atmosphere on the planet. The middle troposphere is 14 kilometers thick at the equator and only 7 kilometers thick at the poles. A look at the data (red) clearly does not show any warming over the last several years, and sea surface temperatures (blue) have been declining for years.

http://www.ssmi.com/rss_research/climate...

.

.

Answer 3

temps going up.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/mpg/...

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/2...

scientific consensus.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/fu...

some related info

http://environment.newscientist.com/clim...

Answer 4

I think you'll find all the evidence you need in this movie...  It is quite undeniable that we have made an impact, even though it is part of the Earth's natural cycle.  

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...

Also think, as the ice on those mountain tops disappears, so does a big part of our natural water supply.  

Sure Sam...  It is a part of the Earth's natural cycle, but think, wouldn't you want to do what you can to keep it habitable?  I mean, yeah, it will not let us destroy it, but it could destroy us if  it wants to.

Answer 5

I wouldn't trust anyone here to be able conclusively to answer you question.  Very few of us are climate scientists.  Most of those claiming to know it is a hoax, don't have the scientific understanding to make that judgement.  It is extremely complex.  What is true is that an international consortium of hundreds of scientists have taken about 20 years to study the problem.  They now have published their third assessment of their findings.  They have looked at all the skeptic's science and still are 95% sure that man is causing global warming.  Since I am not a climate scientist I take their word for it.  Those  who don't are taking the word of the skeptical scientists.  Very few have the knowledge to decide who is right.  I've read the summary of the report.  I wouldn't pretend to have enough science background to understand the math geology, climate science and all that it entails, beyond the summary.  I have some science background and a lifelong interest in science, but i still would only grasp parts of the actual scientific analysis, computer modeling of the climate etc.

Dont be fooled by those who claim they have proof of a fraud.  So far I've seen answers here from one climate scientist who is a skeptic.  

NASA confirms the findings of the consortium.  There are organizations like the Heritage Foundation and others who actuall pay scientists to give support to the skeptical view.  They are funded by oil companies.  so I wouldn't trust anything said by any scientist in anyway connected to them.  Go to http://realclimate.org/

for information.  There is an educational  section for laymen like us to explain their theories.  And they openly present links to all the skeptics websites.

Answer 6

I don't believe global warming is a problem.

I don't care if it is true or not.

I dont care if it is man caused or not man caused.

It has happened many time before

It will happen again

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Ima...

Mammal life started on earth when it was a lot warmer.

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/...

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/...

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/...

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/...

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/...

My problem with global warming  is how it has been turned into a scam by the tree hugger.

How it is being used to try to scam everyone into believing that it will do so many things that it will not do.

I am not against many of the things that the treehuggers want

I am against using a total scam to do it.

I am against lies to do it.

I am against the power grab they are trying using global warming as a scare tactics.

I am against using global warming as scam way for some treehugger to get rich or richer,

I believe the treehuggers should lead the way by actions.

not try to force everyone else to take the burden.

they should stop using oil, gas. cars, and turn off all out side power,

Last summer i went camping and a sierra club group was in the area for a weekend outing.

Over half of the sierra club group was camping in there big gas guzzling motor-homes.

They should go to solar power wind power.  and if they really believe they should do it now.  

Why should humans be forced to live in a ice age we did not make

Answer 7

Yes, global warming is a "natural phenomenon" however, we must look at the evidence that paleoclimatologists have collected over the last 60 years.

Any increase in global temperature in 350 million years of documented climate history from ice cores, ocean cores and swamp cores shows a significant increase in either carbon dioxide or methane prior to that change in climate.

The carbon dioxide levels in our current atmosphere mostly from human causes, is much higher than is "normal" for the earth, and can have unknown consequences.

50 years of weather and temperature studies in Hawaii have concrete evidence of increases in global temperature.

The arctic ice sheets are melting at extreme rates, the greenland ice sheets and the glaciers in the mountains of tibet are receeding hundreds of feet each year, and are not being replaced by seasonal drops in temperature. Those glaciers provide fresh water for over 300 million people....without it, what do they do?

You can call the poles (north and south) the earths air conditioner. Without them, things don't cool down like ocean and surface temperature. As the ocean temps increase, they release more carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere.

Methane leaks off of landfills in ridiculous rates. That's why recycling and composting makes so much sense - the less we put into landfills, the less contribution to that toxic soup we have.

There is evidence that the north pole used to be tropical - like the Florida Everglades - a significant shift in climate made them like they are today.  Large releases of methane frozen on the bottom of the oceans was what contributed to that significant shift.  Oceanographers are documenting an alarming increase in methane release due to the warming of the oceans.

Yes volcanic activity contributes to climate change - but the relatively little volcanic activity we have today is miniscule in comparison - the largest contributor to greenhouse gasses is things like;  cutting down old growth forests (over 90% of them), landfill pollution, the millions of trucks which collect the trash, energy waste of homeowners and businesses, pollution from lawn mowers and weed wackers, the extraction and burning of coal for energy....the list goes on.  

The results of these increases in greenhouse gases are as of yet unknown - but do we take a cross our fingers approach or a preventative approach?  I'd much rather do something to prevent the pollution of the earth than hope that we will leave something good for our grandchildren......the way things are going, I think we will leave them a brown earth with limited resources, not a green one.  

It's like if you found you had cancer - would you cross your fingers and hope it went away - or would you do something to prevent and treat it..............

Answer 8

okay, i believe global warming to a certain degree. we aren't helping our planet, but we aren't hurting it like everyone says. the earth has gone through heating and cooling periods throughout history. and when earth first formed, it had no atmosphere, right? so if it is strong enough to have formed in the first place, how do we expect to destroy or damage it really at all?