Difference between revisions of "Global warming/debate"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Notes: more con links)
(→‎Notes: response to a con post)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 37: Line 37:
  
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
* Points to enter into debate: [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/dhriojMMDye]
+
* Points to enter into debate: [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/dhriojMMDye] [https://plus.google.com/u/0/105317484395739961116/posts/jg3aUPKmT7Q]
 
* '''pro''':
 
* '''pro''':
 +
** '''2013-07-16''' [http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/07/16/has-global-warming-stopped-2/ Has global warming stopped?] by [[Greg Laden]]
 
** '''2012-12-09''' [http://www.livescience.com/25367-first-ipcc-climate-report-accurate.html 20-Year-Old Report Successfully Predicted Warming]
 
** '''2012-12-09''' [http://www.livescience.com/25367-first-ipcc-climate-report-accurate.html 20-Year-Old Report Successfully Predicted Warming]
 
** '''2012-12-27''' [http://www.skepticalscience.com/contary-to-contrarians-ipcc-temp-projections-accurate.html Contrary to Contrarian Claims, IPCC Temperature Projections Have Been Exceptionally Accurate]
 
** '''2012-12-27''' [http://www.skepticalscience.com/contary-to-contrarians-ipcc-temp-projections-accurate.html Contrary to Contrarian Claims, IPCC Temperature Projections Have Been Exceptionally Accurate]
 
* '''con''':
 
* '''con''':
 +
** '''2013-07-21''' [http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/21/2328691/gop-senators-parrot-anti-science-talking-points-at-climate-hearing/ GOP Senators Parrot Anti-Science Talking Points At Climate Hearing]: just for completeness; should probably also be filed under {{l/same|denial}}
 +
** '''2013-05-21''' [http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html 97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them]
 +
*** '''response''': '''2013-07-17''' [http://www.skepticalscience.com/rebutting-new-tcp-myths-andrew-neil-richard-tol.html Debunking New Myths about the 97% Expert Consensus on Human-Caused Global Warming]
 
** '''peer-reviewed''':
 
** '''peer-reviewed''':
 
*** [http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/page.php?8 Peer Reviewed Studies and/or Major Scientific Journal Articles Disputing Man-made Causes for Global Warming]
 
*** [http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/page.php?8 Peer Reviewed Studies and/or Major Scientific Journal Articles Disputing Man-made Causes for Global Warming]

Latest revision as of 15:40, 21 July 2013

About

The debate over global warming is perhaps the single best illustration of why arguments need to be mapped in order to be resolved properly. The sheer volume of resources which have been allocated by industry (especially the fossil fuel industry) towards defeating public acceptance of the various global warming hypotheses has resulted in some arguments that are very elaborate and difficult to answer without a detailed knowledge of not only the basic mechanisms of global warming, but also its history and politics.

Summary

As of 2013, hardly anyone disputes that global warming is in fact occurring; denialism now generally focuses on the following:

  • Humans aren't causing it; the exact mechanism is either unknown or entirely natural.
  • Global warming does not pose a serious problem, and may even be of net benefit. ("We can adapt.")

Structured

right-arrow debaticon Human activity is causing an increase in global warmth which is going to cause severe problems within the next century, and humans therefore need to take steps to slow, stop, and (eventually) reverse this trend.
"i" debaticon All of the following are true:
up-arrow debaticon The earth is currently getting warmer at a rate which is going to cause severe problems within the next century.
up-arrow debaticon The average temperature on earth is increasing.
up-arrow debaticon The rate of temperature increase is going to cause severe problems within the next century.
up-arrow debaticon The "hockey stick" graph is visually compelling evidence of this.
down-arrow debaticon The hockey stick is a misleading fiction; if the same averaging techniques are applied consistently across the entire range, the effect disappears.
up-arrow debaticon There is no evidence that misleading statistical techniques have been applied.
up-arrow debaticon If misleading statistical techniques have been applied, the scientific community would have rejected the GW threat hypothesis. They have not.
up-arrow debaticon The scientific community overwhelmingly embraces the conclusion that GW is a threat.
up-arrow debaticon Human activity is causing most of the current increase in global warmth.
up-arrow debaticon Humans are capable of reversing the global warming trend.
"i" debaticon All of the following are true:
up-arrow debaticon Discontinuing the use of fossil fuels for energy generation would slow, stop, or perhaps reverse global warming.
"i" debaticon All of the following are true:
up-arrow debaticon Discontinuing the use of fossil fuels for energy generation would eliminate most of the GW-causing pollutants.
up-arrow debaticon The primary cause of global warming is "greenhouse gases", primarily carbon dioxide and methane.
down-arrow debaticon Carbon dioxide is not a significant factor in global warming.
down-arrow debaticon CO2 levels lag prehistorical warming trends (see ice core data and therefore cannot be a cause of modern global warming.)
"i" debaticon All of the following are true:
down-arrow debaticon CO2 levels lag historical warming trends.
down-arrow debaticon The lag in CO2 levels proves that rising CO2 did not cause prehistoric global warming.
up-arrow debaticon This is because in the past, warming periods have been initiated by changes in the earth's orbit. This relatively small change causes an increase in CO2 concentration, which causes further warming, leading to a final stable temperature much higher than can be accounted for by the initial "nudge" from the orbitally-induced warming.
down-arrow debaticon If CO2 did not cause prehistoric global warming, it could not cause modern global warming.
up-arrow debaticon The involvement of a particular cause in one case is not disproved by the existence of other causes in another set of cases.
up-arrow debaticon If CO2 rose and there was no corresponding warming, that would be evidence against CO2's involvement -- but this is not what the data shows.
up-arrow debaticon The exhaust from burning fossil fuels contains enormous quantities of carbon dioxide.
up-arrow debaticon It is now technologically and economically feasible to replace fossil fuels with sustainable forms of energy.
up-arrow debaticon Humans should invest considerable resources into reversing the global warming trend.

Notes