Is climate change a real threat to humanity?
Topic

Is climate change a real threat to humanity?

by matt12 added 3 months ago

Yes Add Point
  • Depending on the way scientific consensus is measured, between 90% and 100% of the experts in the field agree that humans are responsible for the phenomenon called climate change. According to a research carried out in 2016, the consensus on the existence and causes of climate change increases directly proportional with the expertise of the authors in question1. According to the same source, some non-experts believe, however, that climate change either doesn’t exist or represents no danger to humankind.

    However, there are some regions where people, regardless of their academic status, believe that climate change is a real threat. Another research2 carried out in 2009 surveyed people from the United States of America. Of those questioned, 52% believed that climate scientists agree on the fact that climate change does exist, and 47% of the subjects also believed that human activities are the ones causing this phenomenon. While scientific consensus is not easily quantifiable, the tone of the scientific papers published on the matter does represent a powerful indicator of the authors’ concern.

    1 http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

    2 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009EO030002/full

    by matt12 added 3 months ago 3 0

    Counter Argument

    Certain atmospheric conditions have a tendency to repeat themselves throughout history. Many hypotheses that were supported by the majority of the scientific community in the past have turned out to be false. As a matter of fact, back in the 1970s, the scientific community used to believe that climate change is a threat. Many scientific minds of the time supported the idea that Earth will go through an ice age during the following century1. It wasn’t just the scientific community who believed in an impending ice age in the 1970s. Several publications, among which Time Magazine, Newsweek and The New York Times published materials on the matter at the time2.

    The fact that science is not infallible alone cannot be considered, in itself, proof against a scientifically proven fact. At the same time, a fact can be interpreted in many ways, even among scientists, which means that longitudinal studies (carried out through many years) are necessary in order to fully support this hypothesis.

    1 https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/that-70s-myth-did-climate-science-really-call-for-a-coming-ice-age/

    2 https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

    by Evelyn added 3 months ago 1 1

    Humanity doesn’t evolve in a linear manner, but on an exponential level. Revolutionary discoveries that it took a thousand years to achieve (until the end of the 19th century, for instance) have been multiplied during the past century and a half. As humankind doesn’t evolve in a linear manner, neither does pollution. Once people have started to grow accustomed to technology and modern appliances (from cars to smartphones), the level of pollution has exceeded all previous quotas1. The technological explosion can, therefore, be held responsible for the increased levels of pollution necessary to building better technology.

    As developed countries have started to focus on services, developing countries have become off-shore areas that support the industry. However, these states lack the capacity to invest in better technologies that would cause less pollution, as they massively focus on heavy industrial productions2. These countries don’t have the necessary financial status to invest in better technologies that would overcome pollution, at least not in the near future.

    1 https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

    2 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2012.html

    by matt12 added 3 months ago 0 0

    Glaciers have been retreating more over the past 10 years than they did in the 100 years before that.

    by archie added 2 months ago 0 0

  • It is true that some developing countries have developed industries in partnership with companies from developed countries. At the same time, as technology evolves, people will too. Assuming the premise that humankind does evolve in an exponential matrix, it shouldn’t take very long for technology providers to come up with solutions that will stop global warming. In fact, efforts towards that goal are already being conducted. The United Nations Industrial Development Organization has an entire plan on implementing a greener industry that will protect the environment1. Additionally, representatives from the private sector have also started working on greener alternatives that could minimize greenhouse emissions2. Both in partnership with prestigious universities or just as a private alternative, green technology is on its way and it looks promising.

    While it may be true that, at this moment, climate change is an issue that could potentially have negative effects on humankind, it is also highly probable for the green industry to be massively developed in the upcoming decades, which would cut down emissions and, consequently, eliminate the danger.

    1 https://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Services/Green_Industry/web_policies_green_industry.pdf

    2 http://www.pitt.edu/~tev14/WA3.pdf

    by Evelyn added 3 months ago 1 1

    Most of the purely scientific issues that people thought to be unsolvable have eventually been resolved by science. It may be true that human behavior (along with our needs, beliefs and habits) are harder to change than scientific solutions. Starting from the premise that global warming could be caused by other factors than human activity, it would be a matter of time until researchers would propose an effective long-term solution. Climate Depot released a report back in 2010, as part of which more than 1,000 scientists were disagreeing that human activity is the primary cause of global warming1. Among these researchers, some of them were even part of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which made them all the more qualified to advance scientific hypotheses on the matter.

    Of the scientists who took part in the report, some discharged the hypothesis of global warming, and others simply presented non-human-related causes that could explain this phenomenon. Scientific means have dramatically evolved over the past decades. Humankind has learned how to redirect asteroids that would have collided with our planet, a technique which wasn’t even considered merely a century ago. It is conceivable that, even though global warming would be a short-term-non-human-related threat, scientists would soon find a way to reverse it.

    1 http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/12/08/special-report-more-than-1000-international-scientists-dissent-over-manmade-global-warming-claims-challenge-un-ipcc-gore-2/

    by Evelyn added 3 months ago 0 0

    Counter Argument

    Ok, I can understand why you have been deluded by the media here because we all would like to assume that we aren't contributing to global warming and thus climate change so that we can continue living our current lifestyles, however, the reality is that we are contributing, more than any other species at that. As you most probably know, climate change is a natural phenomenon and we are currently leaving our most recent Ice Age so as a result, the world is warming up. However, human acts such as deforestation, desertification and the extraction of natural resources are increasing the rate that we are leaving the Ice Age. 2016 was the warmest year on average ever recorded - before that was 2015. More specifically, humans are contributing to something called the 'blanket effect' because our actions are leading to a higher concentration of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, trapping the heat from the sun in our atmosphere and warming the world.

    by Oliver_Downes added 2 months ago 1 0