Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Threat

& nbsp ;Greenhouse gases reflect heat radiation back towards the Earths surface. The sun produces short wave radiation[1]. It's not affected by the molecules of GG so it continues uninterrupted to our surface. When it hits the surface, some of the energy is absorbed and the rest is reflected back as infrared radiation. This frequency causes the molecules of some gasses & ; nbsp ; to vibrate which in turn redirects heat in all directions including towards other vibrating molecules. Therefore more heat is retained in the atmosphere by greenhouse gasses. "Is this meant to indicate that we are not natural? I hope not. Fossil fuels form naturally. They sometimes burn naturally. Helping to burn these fuels is not unnatural, just like lions culling a sick antelope from an otherwise healthy herd. There is no evident benefit of keeping coal in the ground."I think you know what I mean by "natural " ;. Does a natural burning produce as much carbon as we do? If burning fossil fuels was naturally that doesn & ; rsquo ;t mean we should burn them. Forest fire happen naturally yet it & ; rsquo ;s not good if we constantly start them.& ldquo ;Pro basically repeats me on the medieval warm period. I agree about the temperatures. Nothing to dispute there besides to note that the current temperatures are below even Miocene era levels, when volcanic activity has reduced.& rdquo ;I didn & ; rsquo ;t just repeat you, I said that today our global climate is more than the medieval warm period & ; rsquo ;s was. Some parts are warmer, but the global temperature is warmer. Miocene levels were due to the shape of the ocean basins at that time. Allowing warm temperatures to persist despite low levels of carbon dioxide[2]1.& rdquo ;. Pro " ;s [4] is a link to a picture of a section of a paper from 4-5 years before reports on the benefits of elevated CO2 levels. Does Pro agree that later research is better than older research?& rdquo ;There are some benefits, but do you have any paper proving this one wrong?& ldquo ;is to an article analyzing "Sharply increased insect herbivory during the Paleocene " ;Eocene Thermal Maximum," not the effect of CO2 on plants. It is an analysis of the insect diet, not on how CO2 levels destroyed plants & ; rdquo ;Yes, this is evidence from the past of major damage. As the link was suppose to show.& nbsp ;Plants raised with enhanced CO2 supplies and strictly isolated from insects behave differently than if the same approach is tried in an otherwise natural setting. For example, when the growth of soybeans is boosted out in the open this creates changes in plant chemistry that makes these specimens more vulnerable to insects. Plant defenses go down as CO2 levels go up [3]& nbsp ;2.& nbsp ; It & ; rsquo ;s a simple to say just increase water, nitrogen, fertilizer and protect against insects in an enclosed greenhouse but what about doing it in the open air, throughout the entire Earth? Just as increasing the amount of starch alone in a person's diet won't lead to a more robust and healthier person, for plants additional CO2 by itself cannot make up for deficiencies of other compounds and elements. As I said as CO2 increases run up against limited availability of other nutrients. We synthesize nitrogen using non-renewable fossil fuels, which increase CO2 causing us to synthesize more and more nitrogen for the plants. That & ; rsquo ;s not efficient at all. You mentioned the Haber process. Yes it's possible to convert renewable biomass so we can synthesize nitrogen. However the amount of land and even more resources (often including fertilizer) required to do this gets prohibitive.Even if CO2 increases plant growth, this doesn & ; rsquo ;t mean we should want or need more of it. We need to examine the other effects of increased CO2 . Just like if a doctor tells you to take 1 pill, that doesn & ; rsquo ;t mean 4 pills will be better for you.& ldquo ;Thus, an elevation in CO2 would not be a "threat " ; to the Earth. Therefore, Pro has not fulfilled his BoP to show why Man-made global warming is a threat. There is no indication of this.& rdquo ; & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Increase of Western United States wildfire activity, associated with higher temperatures and earlier spring snowmelt [4] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Increased deaths to heatwaves - 5.74% increase to heatwaves compared to 1.59% to cold snaps [5] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Spread in mosquite-borne diseases such as Malaria and Dengue Fever [6] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Increase in occurrence of allergic symptoms due to rise in allergenic pollen [7] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Drying of arctic ponds with subsequent damage to ecosystem[8] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Rainforests releasing CO2 as regions become drier & ; nbsp ; [9] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Substantial negative impacts to marine ecosystems [10][11] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Inhibiting plankton development, disruption of carbon cycle [12] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Increased moralities of sea urchins [13] & nbsp ;& nbsp ; & nbsp ;Threat to fish populations [14] & nbsp ;& nbsp ;& nbsp ; Severe consequences for at least 60 million people dependent on ice melt for water supply [15][16] & nbsp ;& nbsp ;& nbsp ; Contribution to rising sea levels [17][18][19] & nbsp ;& ldquo ;Satellite data do not record the decrease in sun-heat coming to Earth. The process is the same for both sides.& rdquo ;What do you mean?& ldquo ;Pro " ;s opposition to cyclic temperature has been addressed.& rdquo ;I demur. As no forcing has been shown that fits the fingerprint of anthropogenic global warmingThe resolution is affirmed Sources1 http :// www . nc-climate . ncsu . edu / edu / k12 /. LWSW 2 Jonathan P. LaRiviere , A. Christina Ravelo , Allison Crimmins , Petra S. Dekens , Heather L. Ford, Mitch Lyle, Michael W. Wara . Late Miocene decoupling of oceanic warmth and atmospheric carbon dioxide forcing. Nature, 2012; 486 (7401): 97 DOI : 10.1038/ nature11200 3 http :// www . sciencedaily .com/releases/2008/03/080324173612. htm 4 http :// www . sciencemag .org/ cgi /reprint/313/5789/940. pdf 5 http :// oem . bmj .com/content/64/12/827.short6 http :// www . decvar .org/documents/ epstein . pdf 7 http :// www . ncbi . nlm . nih .gov/ pmc /articles/ PMC1480488 /8 & ; nbsp ; http :// www . pnas .org/content/104/30/12395.abstract9 & ; nbsp ; http :// www . sciencemag .org/ cgi /content/abstract/114666310 http :// www . ipsl . jussieu .fr/~jomce/acidification/paper/ Orr_OnlineNature04095 . pdf 11 http :// icesjms . oxfordjournals .org/ cgi /content/full/65/3/41412 http :// webarchive . nationalarchives .gov. uk /+/ http :// www .hm-treasury.gov. uk /media/ FC3 /81/ ExeterpaperProofsTurelyetal . pdf 13 http :// www . eur-oceans . eu / WP9 / Factsheets / FS7 /papers/ Miles%20et%20al% 202007. pdf 14 http :// www . pnas .org/content/107/29/1293015 http :// meteora . ucsd . edu /cap/ pdffiles / barnett_warmsnow . pdf 16 http :// www . sciencemag .org/ cgi /content/short/328/5984/138217 http :// www . sciencemag .org/ cgi /content/abstract/sci;321/5894/134018 http :// www . pnas .org/content/early/2009/12/04/0907765106.full. pdf + html 19 http :// www . skepticalscience .com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate. htm