Debate: Is global warming an issue?
Side: No

I'm not going to tell you what my education level is because it doesn't matter whether I'm a high school drop-out or if I have 4 doctorate degrees. Now I'm not either of those but I'm assuming you get the point that you don't have to be an expert and go to 8 years of college to understand the fundamentals of something at the very least.For my sources, it seems to me that your only argument against me is questioning my sources. No matter what source you choose, it will ALWAYS have some sort of bias so you questioning my sources without any actual rebuttal is not proving me wrong of anything; it's just showing me that you've run out of things to say so instead of taking me for what I'm saying, your only argument is to question my sources.As for the "98% of scientists" that agree that humans are a cause of global warming, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and we'll assume that that study is 100% accurate with no flaws (which it isn't; no study is). Of the scientists surveyed, 98% of them said that we are causing global warming. Okay, so what about the rest of the scientists on the entire planet? It's like asking 100 atheists in a group of 100,000 people if they believe in God. There's just too much gray area to make a conclusion and use it as one of your points.You mentioned that I would have to deny fundamental scientific facts to say that global warming is not caused by humans. Okay, well I was saying before about how you need to break the facts down by yourself and then take a look. It doesn't matter who you hang out with and talk to about this stuff. You still have yet to mention anything about the specific heat of carbon dioxide and water vapor if I'm not mistaking which I mentioned at least 3 or 4 times already. THOSE are fundamental scientific facts, not generalized opinions from my friends who are scientists and that nonsense.It's interesting that you mention NASA because not only is NASA government funded, but also think of it as a puzzle. When the puzzle is all put together, NASA says that global warming is caused by man. But when the puzzle is not put together, the facts they give tell otherwise. I'll give you an example. According to NASA satellites, arctic ice grew 60% in one year (2013). But when they put together their little puzzle, they claim that the ice caps are melting. So which is it? Maybe it's just me, but I can't rely on a source that contradicts itself like that.If you are going to blame global warming on the help of oil companies, then I just have one request of you. Stop using oil. You first. Stop driving your car and heating your home and stop just about everything and go back to the way humans were living 200 years ago. I find it extremely hypocritical for you to blame oil companies for this "global warming" and to preach to everyone to stop using so much oil and whatnot when you're still doing all the same things everyone else is doing.Carbon dioxide is something that we need to live. I could put a space heater by my window and heat up the earth faster than carbon dioxide can. If carbon dioxide is this terrible pollutant, does that mean every time we breathe, we're polluting the earth and contributing to global warming? Oh wait, carbon dioxide is what trees use as food. And to add to that, there are more trees on the earth now than ever in recorded human history.I am well aware that I do not have PhD in science. With that logic, a normal person wouldn't be able to put on a band-aid without being a doctor and someone wouldn't know how to spend a dollar if they weren't a financial adviser. It doesn't take a genius to understand the basics.Would you care to explain to me your reasoning for why if you're looking at specific heats and heat capacities, that you say scientifically doesn't make sense?The only attempts at trying to prove science wrong that have been refuted are most often by people who are closed-minded.