global warming a threat?

Question

im am doing a term paper on global warming.
my question is should the US help in international efforts to slow global warming.
im am saying yes they do need to help.

but i have to have an opposing opinion to.
meaning i need to have reasons as to why people think global warming isnt a big deal. or why some people think its beneficial. ok thanks.

and remember i dont need your opinion of it or anythign unless you have one on why people think its not a big deal.

k much appreciated

i just need reasons why people think its not a threat. if you think it is a threat cool but i dont need to know thta right now. i just need opposing arguements pleaseee

Answer 1

OK, here's a site that gives the opposing arguments and their rebuttal: http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/15656

There's also the UHI (Urban Heat Islands) issue and my rebuttal: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsHgjt6C0gLEVc10DlhzThQgBgx.?qid=20070127194236AAewvFw&show=7#profile-info-a7483aa3254a996bbf245a084eea2dfaaa -- look for "myvoice19" and the "Seek the Truth" reply

Most of the other stuff I've seen is someone finds a few scientists on the oil company payroll and quotes their work like that should invalidate the worldwide consensus. Here's an example: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlGsNGcCIvDzXhtFXLJwntAgBgx.?qid=20070129204521AAbxiEL&show=7#profile-info-0416583bc0c91fd37c5ff71243eb8e09aa --- Look at "HeaslthNut" and my reply underneath

Then there's the people that say we can't stop it so there's no point doing anything. When Bush walked out on the Kyoto talks, he said it was unfair that undeveloped nations should be exempted, so I guess his argument was that since the very smallest contributors shouldn't have to do anything then the LARGEST contributor shouldn't have to either.

Michael Crichton wrote a novel that some use to argue against doing anything. Wikipedia says, "Crichton included a statement of his own views on global climate change at the end of the book, affirming that the world is heating up partly caused by men, but argues, that the harms of this change are unknown. He warns both sides of the global warming debate against the politicisation of science". Wikipedia is great; here's their commentary about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear#Literary_significance_.26_criticism

I'm trying to remember other things I've seen and as they come to me, I will come back and add them.

Answer 2

So first of all, you have to wonder if global warming is actually happening. Did you know we actually cooled from the period of 1950 to 1980? Did you know that in the last 10 years the Antartic ice shelf has thickened every year? There are numerous examples of global cooling as well as warming - which means there's no consensus on the data. The ranges around how much carbon dioxide humans produce go from 3 tons to 1 X 10^3000 tons. That's quite a range. Which means we don't actually understand what humans produce.

What's funny is that the arguments in support of global warming keep changing when the lies spread are disproven. For example, it was brought years ago up that methane causes global warming (so all livestock is killing the earth). It was later found out that our ozone layer is fantastic at breaking down methane and methane produces no threat of greenhouse gasses. This is why you don't hear methane being pushed much anymore. The latest lies are around carbon dioxide and big hurricanes. If not for Katrina, they wouldn't be on their soapboxes yelling about bigger hurricanes, they'd find something else. Also, Katrina wasn't a bad hurricane. The flooding caused pretty much all the damage, which was primarily caused by bad engineering support. Did you know Katrina was only a category 3 when it hit land? Not nearly as brutal as Andrew in the 90s.

Global warming at this point is more of a political issue than scientific. I would like to see more science and less politics. It's a good thing we have a republican in the white house, because at least he's stopped people from going nuts over this.

Remember in all of this, ask yourself, if global warming is real, are humans actually to blame (almost all credible sources say NO). Reducing our oil emissions to 0 really won't solve anything, if you take the time to actually research facts and figures.

Answer 3

HERE IS WHY PEOPLE THINK THAT IT IS EITHER NOT A THREAT OR NOT A BIG DEAL:

Oil & Petroleum companies would be severely threatened economically if governments were to put restrictions on how much oil could be used. If you don't know, oil causes global warming. To stop global warming we must stop using oil. If we do that the fat rich guys that control corporations will lose some money so they hire "scientists" to say that global warming is not a big deal or that we shouldnt worry about it or there is nothing we can do. There is a certain percentage of the population with lower IQ's that believe what these scientists have to say and thus you have the people that believe that global warming is not a big deal.

The IPCC, which some of the people here will tell you is totally uncredible, just stated that global warming is caused from man made sources. QED

Answer 4

It goes like this:

95% of greenhouse gases is water vapor that is almost 100% natural
Around 2% is CO2 (not all man-made)

So contributions of man-made greenhouse gases is insignificant

Global warming is man-made?
Scientific answer: No, its not, humankind could have contributed a bit to global warming, but almost nothing. Even if it's accepted the theory of positive feedback loop, man-made global warming is insignificant.

Global warminig is real?
Scientific answer: Yes it is, its real and there´s nothing we can do to stop it.

Do scientist have a clear view of what is happening?
Not completely. There's a lot of reasearch going on trying to improve the not very sophisticated models that are now in use. The greenhouse gases dynamics are very complex and not very well studied.

Here is a little article I have written on the subject, it could be useful for your paper.

Global Warming - Separating Fact from Fiction:
http://ibloga.infoartperu.com/ibloga_07012522291058.cfm

There's a lot of confused people in this discussion, and it isn't strange because theres a lot of political manipulation of ideas from oil companies and from environmentalists. There's a fight for peoples minds between this two opposing groups, so beware, it's easy to get confused.

Answer 5

i think it is a big deal.. and i think the recent disasters and weird weather patterns are an effect of global warming.. i mean i live in maryland and up 2 like the first week of december it was still in the 60's and 70's .. so yeah i do think global warming is a threat and pretty soon weather patterns might get all mixed up

Answer 6

Most people who think that its not a big deal generally use the argument that it is just a natural cycle that the earth is going through just like the ice ages and hot periods that the earth has experienced in the past. However I am with you on this one and I cannot conceive how anyone could say its beneficial.
Regards, Zyfert http://spyware.cybersprout.com

Answer 7

You can look up Kyoto protocol. But lot of opposing view have to do with economic impact from such actions designed to curve global warming.

Answer 8

it is not a big deal, because Bangladesh is far away.