Global Warming Argumentative Research Paper

Jeff Stewart
Argumentative Research
11/29/2011

Global Warming: Is It Our Fault?
Global warming has been a topic of world-wide discussion and argument for many decades. People take the stance of either: yes, it is real, or no, it is not happening. The group that argues that it is happening states their main argument as being human contribution. But this argument can be rebutted by looking at the research that shows just how much of an impact humans really have on the warming issue and CO2 output, the history of the earth and the solar system, and how valid the topic of global warming really is.
Humans are argued to be the primary CO2 emitters of the world. It is also argued that excess CO2 is the primary reason for any kind of global
warming. However, CO2 only comprises about 3% of our atmosphere. It is not the only greenhouse gas up there. Water vapor accounts for about 95% of any greenhouse effect, CO2 only 3%, and the rest is methane and several other types of gases. Now, of that 3% of CO2, about 97% is produced from nature, not from humans. According to Edmund Contoski‘s research, “Natural wetlands emit more greenhouse gases than all human activities combined. Geothermal activity in Yellowstone National Park emits ten times the carbon dioxide of a midsized coal-burning power plant, and volcanoes emit hundreds of times more, of which there are about 100 active volcanoes today. The combining factors of water vapor and natures’ production of CO2, we see that 99.8% of any greenhouse effect has nothing to do with CO2 emissions from human activity” (2). Humans can be further removed from the equation if one looks at the history of the planet and solar system.
There has been much studying of the history of the Earth and the solar system to better understand global warming. Much of this research goes back millions of years, figuratively speaking. “Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geological, and the studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each lasts about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years” ( Fegel 1). Basically, what he is saying is that the Earth naturally fluctuates between hot and cold eras on a regular cyclic pattern. Fegel’s research also states,”…results from data derived from glacial ice cores collected at Russia’s Vostok station in Antarctica during the 90’s showing global atmospheric temperatures, atmospheric CO2, and other greenhouse gases from 420,000 years ago to present time followed the hot cold period pattern, with a graph-line similar to that of an EKG tracing. The Vostok data also shows that global CO2 levels lag behind global temperature changes by about 800 years…. The Vostok data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past 420,000 years” (2). Constoski’s paper also concurs with this data by writing, “Global temperature has declined since 1998, while atmospheric CO2 has gone the other way, increasing 15-20%”(1). What this means is that rising temperatures cause increased CO2 levels, not the other way around. Warm water releases CO2 more readily than cold water, hence the pattern. Fegel’s research concludes that we are nearing the end of the warming era and getting ready for our cooling era based on the increase in CO2 levels and slow global temp drop over the last 15 years. “In the last 1.6 million years there have been 63 alternations between warm and cold climates…,” (Contoski 2). “The North American Pollen Data Base shows our vegetation completely reorganized by climate change nine times in the last 14,000 years” (Avery 2). These two quotes provide additional argument that measureable temperature swings have happened in the past. This is just some of the geophysical research that has been completed. But, the some of the factors that cause these temperature fluxations do not all occur inside our atmosphere.
The orbital changes of the earth itself, in relation to the sun, also have an effect on the climate. Gregory Fegel has published data about specifics of Earth’s orbit factoring into climate change. Fegel writes, “Most of the long-term climate data collected from various sources also shows a strong correlation with the three astronomical cycles which are together known as the Milankovich cycles. The three Milankovich cycles include the tilt of the earth, which varies over a 41,000 year period; the shape of the earth’s orbit, which changes over a period of 100,000 years; and the Precession of the Equinoxes, also known as the earth’s “wobble,” which gradually rotates the direction of the earth’s axis over a period of 26,000 years. These three cycles, each of which effects the amount of solar radiation which reaches the earth, act together to produce the cycle of cold Ice Age maximums and warm interglacials” (1). This information puts the concept of “global warming” in the category of natural course of the earth. The earth has been experiencing this trend for long before we were around and will experience long after we are gone. So, if “global warming” is a naturally occurring phenomena then what about all the scientific “doomsday” hoopla?
How much of this pro-global warming information is credible truth?
Back in 2009 there was a scandal called “Climategate.” The scandal was about emails that scientists at the Climatic Research Unit in East Anglia who had altered research evidence to trump researchers who did not agree with their conclusions. Paul Joseph Watson has written an article focusing around this scandal. In it he reveals, “The hacked documents and communications reveal how top scientists conspired to falsify data in the face of declining global temperatures in order to prop up the premise that man-made factors are driving climate change. Others illustrate how they embarked on a venomous and coordinated campaign to ostracize climate skeptics and use their influence to keep dissenting reports from appearing in peer-reviewed journals, as well as using cronyism to avoid compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests”(Watson 1). He goes on in his research to say, “Organizations with close ties to the CRU have engaged in psychological terrorism by fearmongering about the planet with doomsday scenarios,” (Watson 2). Watson’s research contains some of the emails that implicate the scientists involved. Most of them are very critical of skeptics of their research. In fact, the main global warming theory, the AGW theory (Anthropogenic [derived from human activities] Global Warming), only covers a time span of about one thousand years. How is 1,000 years of data going to tell what happened 100,000 years ago? The only reason that the global warming scientists do not take into account the actual hard evidence of the ice cores and other physical paleoclimatology is the fact that it does not fit their hypothesis of AGW (Contoski 3). But in the end, going back to “Climategate,” if we cannot trust the data from the leading world climate lab then how can anyone take any data in support of man causing global warming
seriously?
While undoubtedly humans do produce CO2, the amount that they do produce is a raindrop in the ocean. We are only just aware that humans are in a warming cycle that has repeated itself time and time again over millions of years. A cycle that is caused by the inner workings of the earth itself and of the solar system we live in. Humans are not a large enough variable to affect the outcome of the equation.

Works Cited

Avery, Dennis T. “Earth’s Climate Cycle Is Unstoppable.” Hudson Institute, Sept 14, 2004, p.4. www.galegroup.com
Contoski, Edmund. “Global Warming, Global Myth.” Liberty, vol. 22, September 2008 www.galegroup.com
Fegel, Gregory. “Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age.” Pravda.ru, Jan 11, 2009 www.galegroup.com
Watson, Paul Joseph. “Call for Independent Inquiry into Climategate as Global Warming Fraud Implodes.” Prisonplanet.com www.galegroup.com