Topic: Global Warming: Myth VS. Reality.?
June 19, 2019 / By Abiud Question:
I have to write an argumentative research paper about Global Warming being real and it being a myth.
I was wondering if some people could help me grab some info.
I can find information on how Global Warming is real,
but finding how it is a myth is where I'm stumped on finding GOOD information.
If you guys could probably give me thoughts of how it could possibly be a myth or [what i need most] websites of it being a myth.
And anything else Global Warming related would be great because it must be 5 pages long and I need what i can get to fill up that much space.
Sky | 4 days ago
The myth of denying global warming is well documented. Many so-called skeptical "scientists" actually make a living as paid industry shills, part of a PR scam on the part of oil and coal companies, who have hired former tobacco industry lobbyists to run another disinformation campaign like the one that successfully cast doubt on the link between smoking and cancer for so many years:
Slamming the Climate Skeptic Scam
"Few PR offences have been so obvious, so successful and so despicable as the attack on the scientific certainty of climate change.
One major funding source:
Exxposing ExxonMobil's Agenda: Manipulating Politics and the Public
Television and cable networks gladly run fake science to increase controversy and keep their ratings and income high:
At Fox News, a Pundit for Hire
"Objective viewers long ago realized that Fox News has a political agenda. But, when a pundit promotes this agenda while on the take from corporations that benefit from it, then Fox News has gone one disturbing step further"
The Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University, documents how the media supports the false appearance of controversy on the topic of global warming:
Creating controversy where science finds consensus
"A new study has found that when it comes to U.S. media coverage of global warming , superficial balance—telling "both" sides of the story—can actually be a form of informational bias."
Media False Balancing Allowed Extreme Views to be Treated Same as Scientific Consensus
Here's how scientific papers pro and con stack up:
The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles... 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.
For a more detailed list of specific denial myths (debunked):
As for the evidence that global warming is occurring, here's a recent summary and chart from NASA Director James Hansen:
Here's a recent comprehensive article by him as well:
Detail on the 100+ year history behind CO2 science:
Frequently Asked Questions from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. ...
Here are some specific points on various risks, including scientists' observations from the past, and our projected outlook for the future:
Sea Level Rise -
"These coastal measurements indicate that the 2006/2007 global averaged sea level is about 200 mm higher than in 1870 and that since 1870 there has been a significant increase in the rate of the sea-level rise."
Rohling and his colleagues found an average sea level rise of 1.6m (64in) each century during the interglacial period.
Back then, Greenland was 3C to 5C (5.4F to 9F) warmer than now - which is similar to the warming period expected in the next 50 to 100 years, Dr Rohling said.
...roughly twice as high as the maximum estimates in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report..." explained Dr Rohling.
"Instead of sea levels rising by about 40 centimetres, as the IPCC predicts in one of its computer forecasts, the true rise might be as great as several metres by 2100. That is why, they say, planet Earth today is in 'imminent peril.'"
"A one-meter sea level rise would wreak particular havoc on the Gulf Coast and eastern seaboard of the United States.
'No one will be free from this,' said Overpeck, whose maps show that every U.S. East Coast city from Boston to Miami would be swamped."
"melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet would result in a sea-level rise of about 8 meters (table 1). The West Antarctic ice sheet is especially vulnerable, because much of it is grounded below sea level. Small changes in global sea level or a rise in ocean temperatures could cause a breakup of the two buttressing ice shelves (Ronne/Filchner and Ross). The resulting surge of the West Antarctic ice sheet would lead to a rapid rise in global sea level."
Ice sheet melt (and natural vs. current melt rate):
New research confirms that ice sheets in West Antarctica are thinning at a far faster rate than in past millennia.
"This winter might become the mildest winter in Northern Norway ever registered. So far the average temperature in parts of the region has been up to eight degrees Celsius above the normal."
"Ground-based surface temperature data shows that the rate of warming in the Arctic from 1981 to 2001 is eight times larger than the rate of Arctic warming over the last 100 years. There have also been some remarkable seasonal changes. Arctic spring, summer, and autumn have each warmed, lengthening the seasons when sea ice melts from 10 to 17 days per decade."
"This week, after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: "At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions."
Ominous Arctic Melt Worries Experts
'Arctic Is Screaming,' Say Scientists Seeing New Data; Worry Over 'Tipping Point'
"Prior major warmings in Earth’s history, the most recent occurring 55 million years ago . . . resulted in the extinction of half or more of the species then on the planet."
It was the Earth's most severe extinction event, with up to 96 percent of all marine species and 70 percent of terrestrial vertebrate species becoming extinct. Because approximately 25 percent of species survived the event, the recovery of life on earth took significantly longer than after other extinction events. This event has been described as the "mother of all mass extinctions".
A careful examination of a large number of species in numerous parts of the planet projects that a stunning portion of them will be "committed to extinction" in just 50 years, with only modest global warming (Thomas, 2004).
Crop damage and rising food prices:
Food news: http://www.climatechangenews.org/nFood.html
Hunger. Strikes. Riots. The food crisis bites
"Across the world a crisis is unfolding at alarming speed. Climate change, China's increasing consumption and the dash for biofuels are causing food shortages and rocketing prices - sparking riots in cities from the Caribbean to the Far East. Robin McKie and Heather Stewart report on the millions facing starvation - and the growing threat to global security"
Hungry mob attacks Haiti palace
"Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated."
Global warming is a natural phase of Earth, caused by some Solar Activities by Sun. We human don't have to bother about it. Some of the environmentalist says that this is because of the CO2 we are emitting into the environment, but the reality is that we are just contributing towards 1% to 10% of actual global warming.
If the actual cause of Global Warming is CO2 emitted by the humans then why Global Warming occures on other planets. Just Google for "Global Warming on other planets" and see the results, there are no humans on other planets.
Having too little CO2 in the environment will cause for the plants to die more early, more over it also cools down the temperature on earth.
Having too much CO2 (obiviously, not caused by humans. Mostly generated in the Sea/Oceans) will lead to Green House effect and will lead in increasing the temperature on Earth.
So, the best is to plant more trees so that there would be a balance for the consumption of CO2 on the planet.
I personally think that instead of thinking on this baseless issue try to think on what if Nuclear War broke out in the world, it will destroy Earth more rapidly.
So, next time whenever somebody says you about global warming, just ignore it.
Here are 26 myths about global warming. Way more than 5 pages worth.
Are you looking for sources that doubt global warming or that man is the major driver of the recent warming? You won't find many credible resources that doub that the Earth has actually warmed.
Here is a collection of a few peer reviewed papers that put some doubt on the consensus:
Here are a few peer reviewed articles that support the connection between cosmic rays and cloud cover/climate:
These two studies came out at roughly the same time as the S&W paper:
If there is a connection between cosmic rays and climate on short time scales, that could have played a large part (not necessarily the major driver), along with CO2, land use changes, solar influences, oceanic currents, etc in the recent warming.
Liberal democrats would have us all believe in Global Warming - as a means to gain power. There are studies that show that the temperature of the oceans are actually dropping, not increasing.
If Al Gore can convince you to believe in global warming, then you'll be more convinced to believe that OIL is bad, that it is therefore necessary to subsidise corn farmers and also necessary that we all share in a national heathcare to provide for the "effects" of too much carbon footprint.
It's all a power play - Democrats want to scare us into voting for them.
I believe there is plenty of oil. We are not even close to running out and the climate is no more heating up today then it was freezing over 20 years ago (as Jim mentioned in this thread).