One should work against global warming and avoid extinction from it, even if it is non-anthropogenic

"But to clarify, the action also has to have some probability of actually working. It's not enough to just desire something, and then do something else" --> So the burden of the debate is clear. Weighing proability of success is a key component of judging the round. Namely doing X achieves Y. Onto the NC evidence which will have a clear link to the burden: 1) Best Data Proves Global Warming happens every 1500 years regardless of human activity - INEVITABILITY (no success of active participation, AC has no solvency) Singer, distinguished research professor at George Mason and Avery, director of the Center for Global Food Issues at the Hudson Institute, 2007 (S. Fred, Dennis T, “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years” Pages 1-5) The Earth is warming but physical evidence from around the world tells us that human-emitted CO2 has played only a minor role in it. Instead, the mild warming seems to be part of a natural I ,500-year climate cycle The cycle has been too long and too moderate for primitive peoples lacking thermometers to recount in their oral histories. But written evidence of climatic change does exist. The Romans had recorded a warming from about 200 B.C. to AD. 600, Histories from both Europe and Asia tell us there was a Medieval Warming. Human histories also record the Little Ice Age, which lasted from about 1300 to 1850. But people thought each of these climatic shifts was a distinct event and not part of a continuing pattern. The first ice cores extracted from Greenland.' Provided 250,000 years of the Earth's climate history in one set of "documents." The scientists compared the ratio of "heavy" oxygen-18 isotopes to the "lighter" oxygen-16 isotopes, which indicated the temperature at the time the snow had fallen. They expected to find evidence of the known 90,000-year ice ages and the mild interglacial periods recorded in the ice, and they did. However, they did not expect to find anything in between. To their surprise, they found a clear cycle— By the mid-1980s, however, the First World had already convinced itself of the Greenhouse Theory and believed that puny human industries had grown powerful enough to change the planet's climate. A wealth of other evidence has emerged since 1984, however, corroborating natural I ,500-year climate cycle: An ice core from the Antarctic's Glacier-at the other end of the world known advances and retreats in the glaciers of the Arctic, Europe, Asia, North America, Latin America, New Zealand, and the Antarctic. • seabed sediment cores . • Cave stalagmites from Ireland and Germany in the Northern Hemisphere to South Africa and New Zealand in the Southern Hemisphere . • Fossilized pollen from across North America• In both Europe and South America, archaeologists have evidence that prehistoric humans moved their homes and farms up mountainsides during the warming centuries and retreated back down during the cold ones. The Earth continually warms and cools. The cycle is undeniable, ancient, often abrupt, and global. It is also unstoppable. Isotopes in the ice and sediment cores, ancient tree rings, and stalagmites tell us it is linked to small changes in the irradiance of the sun. The cycle shifts have occurred roughly on schedule whether CO2 levels were high or low. Based on this 1,500 year-cycle, the Earth is about 150 years into a moderate Modern Warming that will last for centuries longer.The climate has been most stable during the warming phases, 2) Even if all global emissions stopped today, past emissions = inevitability Nicholas Stern—Head of the British Government Economic Service—2007 (Former Head Economist for the World Bank, I.G. Patel Chair at the London School of Economics and Political Science, The full warming effect of past emissions is yet to be realised. The oceans have taken up around 84% of the total heating of the Earth’s If global emissions were stopped today, some of this heat would be exchanged with the atmosphere as the system came back into equilibrium, causing an additional warming. The world is committed to a further warming of 0.5° - 1 °C over several decades due to past emissions 3) CO2 only 2% of warming Lindzen, 92 – Professor of Meteorology at MIT (Global Climate Change, pg. 110, Y4.EN2:S.Hrg.102-808, May 6 and 12) That is the point. We have done calculations where we, for other reasons, increase CO2 20 times and we actually expected a profound effect. We found even then water vapor swamped the whole behavior of the system. It is not an unanswered question. You take CO2 out of the system. You are still left with 98 percent of the greenhouse effect. ==Conclusion== Remember, the burden in the round is to prove that action results in the desired effect. Insofar as global warming is inevitable,there will BE NO SUCCESS. Moreover, my argument kicks premise 2 and 3 of his warming argument. Plus, all my evidence should sufficiently link in to the science analysis my opponent provided in the 1st round. Thank you