Arguments Against Climate Change

Even scientists who think human activity is the main cause of climate change don't deny that natural changes will cause temperature fluctuations on Earth. However, their argument is that in the current cycle of climate change, the impact caused by man is far greater. But there’s no indication that the two sides of the climate change debate will reach any common ground in the near future on what scientific evidence is showing, or what policy decisions should be adopted.

The climate change is overall change, which has taken place in global climate pattern due to increase of carbon dioxide in many folds. Whether it is responsibility of individual or the government to control the climate change has become a moot point for many years. Proponents and opponents of both the views have their own strong arguments. Before coming to an end, I would like to light on both the views in my imminent paragraphs.

The author is questioning the connection between the obligation a state holds to protect the livelihood and property of its citizens, and whether denying to “address” climate change makes them liable for the negative effects it has on their citizens. If refusal to mediate climate change, on an international level, constitute as neglect of state duty when climate change has a direct impact on people’s lives. The rights issue is lies between the right to state sovereignty and the rights of individuals to protection and well-being.

Beginning with Mark Hendrickson’s argument, he recognizes that the climate is changing. He wrote in his article “Climate Change-Hoax or Crime of the Century” that the Earth has emerged from a Little Ice Age not that long ago, and it would be worrisome if the climate around the globe was not warming

An urgent issue, climate change is undoubtedly a sweeping global dilemma of paramount importance. Though most people are aware of this fact, many either choose to ignore it, or acknowledge it, but take no action against it. Those who do choose to take action usually attempt to combat climate change by using the methods that are most commonly discussed: becoming more energy efficient, recycling, and reducing emissions through using more sustainable transportation. Though these actions are helpful, they are not the most efficient way to counter climate change.

Propaganda infested the debate on climate change after interest groups’ increasingly high expenditures financed the argument against climate change. Although propaganda is blatantly common on both sides, the opponents’ weakest link is the science and therefore the logic. Phillips and the Americans for Prosperity abundantly spent on advertisements that persuaded the American public's opinion on climate change. These advertisements were full of logical fallacies, admittingly by Phillips. Eventually, the U.S. Senate took a delagate role where “constituents’ opinions and preferences [are] reflected in legislative opinion”. From the ground up, Americans for Prosperity’s money and propaganda convinced the U.S. Senate to vote against the cap-and-trade

Wildfires and Floods are both caused by climate change. For example onto why this is a massive problem, California had 10 largest modern wildfires in the last 14 years. The fires are horrible because they have destroyed more than 6,000 structures . Next, Floods are another huge problem for the earth. Floods have became larger in rivers and streams causing massive damage. They were three times more deadly in Hurricane

Supporters of the Global Warming Hoax claim that climate change is not due to human activities, instead it is produced with biased data for the purpose of financial or political gain. In this paper, nine sources, including reports from organizations, a speech from a senator, news articles and blog posts, are presented to discuss . These sources come from three perspectives: 1. Those who support the idea of global warming as a hoax; 2. Those who support the idea of global warming as a reality; 3. Academics who provide data and research relating to the issue.

The more people habituating the planet, the more potential there is for emission of greenhouse gasses. In short, the basis of this argument other than years of documented research and scientific discovery is what harm could we do by being more conservative in our use of energy and other entities that produce more than their share of greenhouse gasses? The answer as it stands now is none. The harmful effects of ignoring this crisis are all but proven fact.

Here at The United Students Against Climate Change organization, our allegiance is to our planet and our goal is to help improve the environment we all live in. Because of these values that our organization holds, we cannot support Trump or his way of thinking, as they prove to be disastrous in regard to global warming and climate change. We join countless other environmental organizations in the fight against climate change, coming up with ways to combat it and inspiring others to make the changes necessary towards bettering our planet. He has said he wants to produce more coal, more oil, and more natural gas. He’ll also throw out the Obama administration’s regulations on emissions from power plants. This will only set us backward and make the world we live in and the air we breathe more at risk. During a time when sea levels and temperatures are rising, children are being poisoned by lead in their

exists at all. Enormous amounts of publications have been written on the subject of climate change. Many authors and environmentalists argue their cases and present different perspectives on the controversial subject. While some argue that the risks of climate change are high, others hold the view that the risks have been greatly exaggerated. Some scientists believe that human beings are the cause of climate change, but on the contrary other scientists hold the opinion that nature is the primary cause of climate change and that climate change will not be a serious problem. These issues are currently being debated, and will significantly affect

Statement of Purpose: Why the issue of global climate change is irrelevant to a large number of individuals.

A fallacy or an ugly truth? The Global Warming debate has been circulating in the minds of everyone from the most qualified, knowledgeable scientists to the average layman. With the abrupt end of the last major ice age over 7000 years ago, the new climate era’s advance into the 21st century covers most of the time mankind has inhabited a planet with a mild and relatively stable and unchanging climate, is clearly compelling. From sea levels rising, to the melting of the glaciers, loss of fresh water and increase in natural disasters, this phenomenon is a threat advancing with tumultuous force, and little warning for those who cannot be bothered to notice the signs. The evidence that climate change is a naturally occurring consequence of human action is a fact that needs to be recognized, and recognized now. Global warming is a fact because weather has become more intense over time, a rise in sea level has occur and there has been a change in earth and water temperature.

Some believe global warming isn't a man made problem, but just a cycle of ‘weather patterns’. For example, our now president -Donald J. Trump- doesn't consider climate change to a threat to the inhabitants of earth. Our president also said that global warming is a ‘hoax’.

Climate change has been a very popular topic lately with all the crazy natural acts of destruction occurring lately. Hurricane Harvey, Irma and now Hurricane Nate. Most experts argue that the recent occurrence of tropical storms has to do with the tremendous amount of global warming within the atmosphere. I for one agree that there is a correlation between climate change and natural disasters. The outcomes of an increase in global temperatures include increased risk of drought and increased intensity of storms and tropical cyclones with higher wind speeds.