Alarmist Or Denier Research Paper

Misty Reed

Everest University

12/31/2014

EVS 1001

Instructor Drummond

Global Warming: Which are you Alarmist or Denier?
The debate between whether global climate warming is due to manmade causes or natural ones is an ongoing socio economic and political debate.

This paper will give supporting scientific evidence to both sides of this debate and conclude with my personal opinion and standpoint on this issue.

Pg. 1.

Naturally occurring greenhouse gases are needed to maintain the earth’s temperature at inhabitable levels.
Without these greenhouse gases the earth would be too cold for
human and most other life forms. Green house gases include Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and water vapor. However an excessive amount of greenhouse gases can cause earth’s temperature to warm considerably which causes major and occasionally catastrophic changes to weather and wind patterns as well as the severity and frequency of various types of storms.
Global warming caused by human production of greenhouse gases result in an increase of the earths average surface temperature due to these high levels rising of greenhouse gases. The global warming climate is an ongoing political and socioeconomic debate that we have been in for years and years. There are two stand points to this issue. The two parties involved are the “Alarmists” and the “Deniers”. The Alarmists believe humans are the main source of global warming and if we do not do something about it we will eventually cause the destruction of earth. The deniers state that while yes humans do create some greenhouse gases it is not enough to cause the destruction of earth. Which side of this argument are you on? To help me decide which stand point
I have chosen I have done research on this topic as well as both sides of beliefs. Here are some scientific evidence that support each side of this debate.

The IPCC is mentioned in one of my evidential support ideas so you need to know that IPCC stands for
Intergovernmental panel on climate change. This organization was formed in 1988 by the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programed (UNEP) to provide a comprehensive
and objective assessment of scientific, technical, and socio-economic information that could lead to better understanding of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts, and the options for adaption and mitigation. Scientific evidence that supports the viewpoint that the greenhouse effect of global warming is a naturally occurring issue rather than manmade are as follows…

1) The rate of global temperature is on a decline putting it on the verge of falling beneath even the lowest

projections of virtually all climate change models.
2) The IPCC quotes climate sensitivity numbers (the degrees c per doubling of CO2 which is Carbon dioxide

concentrations) in the 3.5 range. These numbers imply that given the amount of CO2 we have provided

in the past, we should have already seen about 1.5-2.5 c of warming. In actuality we have seen about

0.7 c and all that is probably not likely due to CO2.

3) A Yale study states that more scientifically literate Americans are less frightened of climate change than

their low informative neighbors.

4) Naturally occurring disasters cause a greater and more damaging effect on the earth’s climate than

anything else.

Scientific evidence supporting that global warming is caused by humans….. Pg.2
1) Burning fossil fuels like petroleum and coal produce carbon dioxide by products which emit
greenhouse

gases.
2) As of 2010 the concentration of carbon dioxide is 50% higher than it was before the start of the industrial

revolution in the 1800’s.

3) Motor vehicles are responsible for almost a quarter of annual U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide, the

primary global warming gas. The U.S. transportation sector emits more CO2 than all but three countries

emissions from all sources combined. Motor vehicle emissions will continue to increase as more

Americans increase their vehicle mileage as well as the amount of vehicles American’s continue to add

to our roads.

4) The United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) observed in 2006 that between 25 to 30

percent of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere each year -1.6 billion- is caused by

deforestation. Trees are 50 % carbon. When they are felled or burned the CO2 they store escapes back

into the air.

These are just a few of the many, many facts I have found so far on this topic. It is easy to understand why there is so much division in this area. It is proven that humans burning fossil fuel and causing deforestation as well as emitting carbon dioxide in the air driving motor vehicles increases greenhouse gases and that greenhouse gases cause a rise in the earth’s temperature and climate so it is simple common sense that increases in deforestation and motor vehicles, refrigeration, cooling products like air conditioners, and things we run with electricity or use with burning oils will only increase the emmittence of greenhouse gases. As more humans are born into the world and more drilling of oils and vehicles are created the more we contribute to the issue of global warming. By using more energy efficient products like hybrid cars and by making better choices like carpooling we can lessen our impact on global warming.

On the other side of this issue yes humans contribute to greenhouse gas production but the cost of going completely green could cause economic ruin. Also the percentage of human contribution to greenhouse gas emittance is not so high that we alone could cause global warming. It would take millions more people and millions more of cars and fossil fuels burning to cause a significant danger to the earth.

In my opinion it seems the best solution to this issue is that if we start making better choices and using more energy efficient products we can slow down the greenhouse gases we cause enough to eliminate the chance of global warming. If we could find different and better ways to produce certain products and the ways we use these products instead of just continuing to produce more of the same products that would go a long way in decreasing global warming. I personally do not believe we are in immediate danger of global warming occurring in the next 50 or so years but if we do not find better alternatives to the ways we live and use products everyday it may very well become a big issue that we cannot avoid.

References Used: www.forbes.com www.usliberals.com www.enironment.about.com
www.usconservatives.com