9-1b Listening - Global Warming

There are some very compelling arguments made in favor of the position that global warming is directly caused and worsened due to human activity. There's a great deal of agreement among the scientific community that this is what is actually happening, and yet there are those, some very well-respected scientists themselves, who disagree with this and see other non-human factors as being the cause. First we should look at where there is agreement and clear up the problem of using terms like man-made global warming, also known as anthropogenic global warming. That's anthropogenic, A-N-T-H-R-O, which refers to people as in the study of anthropology. Then P-O-G-E-N-I-C, think genesis, meaning the beginning of something. And it refers to an event that is caused by humans. After that, we'll outline the arguments used by those who disagree with the commonly held belief about global warming, and you can use what we've already gone over to discuss where you stand on this debate later.

There are some very compelling arguments made in favor of the position that global warming is directly caused and worsened due to human activity. There's a great deal of agreement among the scientific community that this is what is actually happening, and yet there are those, some very well-respected scientists themselves, who disagree with this and see other non-human factors as being the cause.

First we should look at where there is agreement and clear up the problem of using terms like man-made global warming, also known as anthropogenic global warming. That's anthropogenic, A-N-T-H-R-O, which refers to people as in the study of anthropology. In P-O-G-E-N-I-C, think genesis, meaning the beginning of something. And it refers to an event that is caused by humans.

After that, we'll outline the arguments used by those who disagree with the commonly held belief about global warming, and you can use what we've already gone over to discuss where you stand on this debate later.

The world is getting warmer. Even the staunchest skeptics cannot deny that, and the evidence shows that global temperatures are rising, regardless of the cause. So there is some common ground there. Also, not in doubt is the fact that the sun is a major contributor to global climate change. However, whether or not it affects climate immediately or over time may be in dispute. At least on these issues, we don't have to worry about arguments too much.

But before we go any further into the pertinent, important arguments, we have to see what each side means by man-made.

In a 2009 poll, many respected scientists were asked, quote, do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

However, one has to take pause and consider the meaning of the question before answering it. What does significant mean? Is there a number that can be attributed to significant? And does it mean the majority of global warming is people's fault? If I think somewhat, should I answer yes?

If people make claims that humans are causing global warming, most scientists may disagree simply because that assigns too much responsibility and causation on humans and what they do.

For our purposes, let's try to get around the semantics and vocabulary of this part of the debate and agree that we won't be discussing cause but contribution and won't even discuss degree of that contribution. This leaves us with a slightly different perspective and question.

Global warming is happening around us now. But is human activity contributing to global warming? Within that context, we'll still take a look at the arguments of those who disagree and why they hold their views.

One main argument these anthropogenic skeptics use has to do with the relationship between carbon in the atmosphere and climate change. While they argue there is a definite link when it comes to carbon levels and global temperature throughout the Earth's history, they believe there is a lag or delay in the cause-effect relationship between them. Using ice core samples from 240,000-year-old glaciers in Antarctica, where the ice is hundreds of millions of years old, scientists can analyze the air trapped in bubbles in the ice and analyze it to see what atmospheric conditions were like at that time, including global CO2 carbon dioxide content.

Anthropologists claim the ice record indicates that carbon dioxide levels tend to rise 600-1,000 years before there is a direct effect on global temperature. They even claim that the massive melting associated with rising temperatures releases even more CO2 into the air, thus making the situation even worse. So there is a relationship, as we said, between this important greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, and temperature. But think what that means for the man-made global warming argument. During the severe climate change in the past, there was no industrialized human activity, let alone proper humans as we think of them.

And if our biggest contribution of CO2 into the atmosphere only happened since the Industrial Revolution some 250 years ago, the effects of that carbon dioxide would not even be felt at this time. Perhaps in another 400 years or more, it will be consequential. But that's not the issue now. But these skeptics feel humanity is being unjustly blamed for something it has not done.

Another large area of dispute is over the reports made that support human global warming, especially those produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, which is a group begun by the United Nations in 1988 made up of thousands of scientists charged with monitoring global warming and coming up with solutions to it. This panel is seen as the leading authority on global warming. But this means it is also the number one target of skeptics who argue that the IPCC is very easily swayed or influenced by political and corporate figures who are trying to get reports to be as favorable for them as possible. For example, they have in the past been critical of evidence that some oil-producing natures have objected to and tried to suppress certain evidence that may show fossil fuels have more impact than thought. That would paint those governments' oil production in a negative light, so they try to hide the data from the public by changing IPCC member opinions. That's the claim, anyway.

Skeptics have also questioned the data collected by the IPCC that is used in some of their more important graphs showing increases in atmospheric carbon content. Regardless of how much either side of the debate believes we are to blame for the current situation, they agree it's getting warmer and there could very well be dire consequences. Millions of people could perish from rising sea levels and strange weather patterns that will see floods in some areas and droughts in others.

But here, even the way to deal with these impending problems divides those on each side of the global warming issue. On the one side there is mitigation, which means that people can have an impact on reversing climate change and we must do all we can to be sure as many lives are saved as possible.

Mitigation measures proposed by the IPCC include reducing carbon emissions, so the skeptics obviously look at this approach to the problem and use the argument that if human activity is not significant enough to cause the problem, how can any mitigation of human activities hope to solve it? It presupposes that human activity caused the climate change in the first place. Instead, skeptics believe that the only solution may rely on adaptation, not mitigation.

Adaptation strategies aim to help people survive impending climate change by learning to live in warmer, drier conditions the future may provide and changing how we live to match our environment rather than the other way around. This could mean farming on mountaintops or living underwater, depending on the situation. Mitigation, they argue, could also divert necessary resources from adaptation efforts and spell disaster.

There you have it. The world is getting warmer, but experts can't agree why it's happening or even what the best strategies are for dealing with it. The debate is far from over and continues all too publicly. Global warming is an issue that everyone seems to know about and has an opinion on due to its admission into popular culture and entertainment. We can only hope someone is right and that when it comes down to dealing with it, the right group is taking the lead. So, let's see what you think about the issue.