Manmade global climate change is real and a threat.

My opponent accepts that his first argument is a correlation so there is no need to strengthen my argument there. My opponents second argument states, """When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to release CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise. Overall, about 90% of the global warming occurs after the CO2 increase.""" To disprove this I will do it line by line. Line 1: When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit This line is true but only in some cases. For example, the mini ice age, which we exited 1000 years ago, was not initiated by changes in the earths orbit. Line 2: This line is just wrong. The oceans do store Co2 but what is released when they warm is mostly water vapor, not Co2. This water vapor then causes more clouds which then cools the Earth. This is common knowledge among scientists because this is exactly how cosmic rays cause cooling. Line 3: Yes, rising temperature causes more Co2 to be released but by simply looking at ice core data we can see that this does not cause an infinite rise in temperature. The temperature then drops and rises again independent of the Co2 that was released from the previous rise. For an example, look at this graph: http://www.geocraft.com... My opponents next argument is just plain wrong. My opponent states, ""Even if we ignore long term trends and just look at the record-breakers, 2015, 2014, 2010, and 2005 were hotter than 1998. The myth of no warming since 1998 was based on the satellite record estimates of the temperature of the atmosphere. However, as discussed in the video below by Peter Sinclair, even that argument is no longer accurate. The satellites show warming since 1998 too." " To disprove this all you need to do is read the caption at the top of the graph below where it lists its source. http://4.bp.blogspot.com... As you can see, the graph was not based on temperature estimates but the "global mean temperature change..." I don't know where you got the idea that 2015, 2014, 2010, and 2005 were hotter than 1998 but from your sources it seems that this data is only true once you remove the El Nino. My question to you is why hasn't the Earth warmed since the El Nino. In the 20 years since the temperature maximum temperature doesn't increase at all. In addition to this, the El Nino just proves the fact that there are other influences in climate that influence temperature more then Co2 or enough to distort data. For my opponents next argument he states that my source is not credible. This is just not true. Just because the maker of the website is paid to research evidence against man made global warming does not immediately make all of his evidence untrue. My opponent does not provide any actual contrary evidence to debate this point but to satisfy their needs I will give a link to multiple graphs sourced from other websites showing the same thing. http://c3headlines.typepad.com... http://www.drroyspencer.com... http://i.dailymail.co.uk... http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com... My opponents next argument is not relevant to man made climate change. My opponents next argument states, "Not every prediction in the Inconvenient Truth came true. Nevertheless polar bears are struggling and many ice caps are melting. [5] As for the polar bears this is due to hunting restrictions and bans. " I will cede this point to my opponent as it is a result of warming and not relevant to man causing the warming. I should not have brought it up and while I still have arguments to dispute it do not wish to argue this view any longer. As for why the documentary was manipulated, I do not wish to argue this any more either for the same reasons listed above nevertheless I will provide a short article to explain my first argument. I know that the article does not provide much info on the subject but if you really want to understand the argument then you need to research it yourself. http://www.newsmax.com... Nextl, to strengthen my point of the debate, I will argue that Earth is not the only planet warming. The entire solar system seems to be going through a sort of "climate-change phase." Within the last 20 years scientists at NASA and around the world have realized that the planets we are looking at now are different than those in 1900s. This indicates that the entire solar system is in some sort of solar-system wide climate change. For example, the ice caps on Mars are shrinking (indicating warming) and the atmosphere is gaining clouds and ozone, Pluto is experiencing a growth of its mysterious dark spots and is experiencing a 300% increase in atmospheric pressure (indicating warming), Saturn is giving off large amount of x rays and there are new appearances of "hot spots" in its atmosphere (indicating warming), there have been polar shifts on Uranus and voyager 2 picked up large storm spots In its atmosphere that were not there 50 years ago (indicating warming), Mercury is growing a magnetic field, Jupiter"s "white ovals" are disappearing and melding together in its atmosphere (this is theorized to have been caused by an 18 degree Celsius warming and this is supported by the new large storm spots appearing on Jupiter for the first time), Venus has had a 2500% increase in green glow which symbolizes oxygen in the atmosphere, and Neptune is experiencing changes in light intensity. As you can see from the long paragraph I have provided above, the entire Solar System seems to be warming or experiencing some sort of weird climate change patterns. This indicates more then just a global event. To conclude my argument, I will provide a graph of Co2 and Temperature over the long term that should, on its own, disprove entirely the idea of man-made climate change. http://www.paulmacrae.com...