Anonymous
Anonymous asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 6 years ago

How does one debate the reality climate change?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 6 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    As with all debates, you need to establish definitions.

    What is meant by "climate change"? Will it be a debate on whether the climate changes at all or are you concerned only with man-made effects?

    Interestingly, many here have offered a view without reference to any definition. How can their answers be considered objective?

    If you are concerned only with the man-made effects are you interested from a purely academic standpoint or will the debate be about how bad those effects will be? If so, should we also know how much the natural effects are. They could drown out the man-made effects or they could be insignificant.

    So, you need to look at the data and compare it with the previous data and see if any forecasts can be made.

    Unfortunately, there is not very much previous data, thermometers are a quite recent invention in climate terms. Also, because the science is still in its infancy, accurate forecasts are not possible, so much so that the IPCC claims not to make any.

  • 6 years ago

    Most other sciences can be rationally debated but when you have $1 billion / year climate denial industry whose sole purpose is not research but to propagate disinformation about climate science, scientists just haven't the chance.

    The climate denial industry even has it's own IPCC called the NIPCC. Unlike IPCC, the NIPCC pays its lead authors hundreds of thousands of $$$. Delegates are paid $10,000 just to attend.

    Whereas, most scientists work for the IPCC voluntarily. The best they can get is probably the expenses back on their postage stamps. Also, the IPCC doesn't really conduct any research itself, but collates studies from ALL sources and uses at leats 15000 reviewers.

    Whereas the NIPCC has less than half a dozen.

    You be the judge.

  • Kano
    Lv 7
    6 years ago

    Well for a start, do NOT use "with hard facts and evidence" or "The data that has been collected easily illustrates the effect" because you will be called upon to produce such data and evidence, and that will not be as easy as think.

    Empirical evidence showing CO2 causes warming and not natural causes, is not yet available.

    Again do not use the often repeated phrase "basic science and physics" for the same reason, you will be asked to explain the basic physics and science, and as far as I know the only physics generally accepted is that a doubling of CO2 will cause an increase in 3.7watts per sq meter, which equates to 1C warming, the rest is unproven conjecture.

  • 6 years ago

    Just a reminder, CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas and sea level rise is not the only concern of climate scientists.

    - Reduced arctic/antarctic ice reduces albedo which increases warming.

    - Methane released from permafrost do to low level CO2 induced warming will cause a much more powerful greenhouse effect.

    - Water vapor is an incredibly potent greenhouse gas, rising temperatures cause an increase of atmospheric water vapor.

    I'm sure there is plenty that I forgot to mention, these examples should be enough to remind everyone that climate change is effected by much more than CO2 and the are bigger concerns than sea level rise. If you are unaware of these things you need to do more research.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 6 years ago

    The debate on Global Warming is over. Something like 98% of the scientific community believes that global warming is a real thing and is happening.

    The remaining 2-3% that oppose the idea, have hidden agendas or like Simon states, They are too dumb to understand or they just like to argue

    So, while it can't be said "everyone" agrees, we should look past the small amount of people who oppose global warming and consider their "opinion" on the matter useless until new information is provided.

  • 6 years ago

    With a suit of body armor. And a Kevlar vest. And a football helmet.

  • 6 years ago

    The data that has been collected easily illustrates the effect. Unfortunately those who "don't believe" are so pig-sh1t thick that they can't understand it.

  • 6 years ago

    With hard facts and evidence.

    Unfortunately some people choose to ignore evidence even if you shove it right in their face, these people are just ignorant, they are probably not worth wasting your time with.

    Our time is limited, therefore precious, there is no point wasting time on idiots.

  • 6 years ago

    You can't. Debating so-called "global warming" is like debating a religion. Those who believe will never see any view that doesn't ahear to their dogma.

  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    idk

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.