WORLD

Global Warming

The Hottest Debate of the Decade

Kristen Flint 14

lobal warming has been a point

of contention in our society for
years, and the extreme views
from both sides of the argument have
transformed the subject of global warming from a factual theory into a mythical
idea. At one extreme, those who consider themselves green bemoan the
tragedy that man is causing our planets
climate to heat up while the other side
of the debate refuses to believe any part
of the global warming theory. Behind
both opinions, there is often confusion,
misunderstanding, and a general lack
of knowledge. The theory that global
warming has anthropogenic causes has
existed for over a century, and scientists have collected evidence on global
warming for over fifty years. In spite
of the evidence, the public generally
lives in the dark, constantly wondering if global warming is fact or fiction.
Global warming is the increase in
the Earths temperature caused by increased emission of greenhouse gases
into the atmosphere (1). The greenhouse

gases, including CO2, form a blanket

in the Earths atmosphere that traps
heat and causes global temperatures
to increase (1). This theory of global
warming was first offered by a Swedish chemist named Svante Arrhenius
in 1896 (2). Arrhenius estimated that
doubling the level of carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere would raise the mean
global temperature by several degrees
(2). Even then, his audience was skeptical as many other factors could also
affect global temperature. Since Arrhenius paper, the global warming discussion has grown convoluted as both scientists and the media have addressed
the subject. Scientists track climate
change and publish their evidence, but
then the media hypes it up in its articles
to the public. To add to the confusion,
the public tends to avoid thinking much
about the topic unless extreme weather
occurs unexpectedly. However, despite
overwhelming opinions, there are facts
to support both sides of the debate.

Media vs. Science

The greatest source of confusion
about global warming comes from the
media. During periods of natural disasterearthquakes, floods, hurricanes
the media reports more heavily about
the existence of global warming. At
other times, and in certain regions, the
media stops discussing global warming
completely. When global warming first
came to the forefront of science, politics, and our culture, scientists were
the main sources of information for the
media (3). More recently, the sources
have changed to interest groups and
politicians rather than those directly researching the topic (3). For example, in
2006, Al Gore created the well-known
documentary An Inconvenient Truth
to relay certain facts and predictions
about global warming. His documentary made over $49 million, reaching millions of people and starting more conversations about global warming (4). Its
success outweighs the success of most

Image courtesy of Robert Simmon/NASA.

During the decade between 2000 and 2009, average surface temperatures increased by as much as two degrees Celsius in certain locations over
benchmarks recorded between 1951 and 1980.
FALL 2011

15

papers published in scientific magazines because it reached such a vast audience (4). The politician replaced the
scientists as the informer of the public.
This mixing of sources from scientists and politicians has caused the
media to convey a greater sense of uncertainty about global warming. PhD
student Jessica Durfee and associate
professor Julia Corbett from the University of Utah department of communication studied the publics response to
articles about global warming that used
conflicting sources. Durfee and Corbett
made up four versions of a news story
based on a scientific article that suggested some uncertainty about global
warming. Several people read each version, which differed in the amount of
controversy and context they included,
and then took a survey about their certainty of global warming. Durfee and
Corbett found that scientific context
led to the greatest certainty about global warming, and controversy caused
greater uncertainty about the issue.
Furthermore, added controversy between the differing scientific and political opinions diminished the perceived
importance of global warming. (3)
The Internet provides another source of confusion about global
warming. Scientific articles, news articles, and blog entries found on the
Internet all provide accounts of global
warming but have dramatically different levels of credibility. However, the
average Internet user does not take the
credibility of his or her sources into account. To further complicate matters,
the Internet has so many articles on the
subject that the information a reader
receives depends on factors such as the
Web design of the article and the sites
to which the article is linked rather
than the credibility and truth of the
article. Thus, the Internet does not always provide clear, high-quality facts
and evidence for global warming. (1)

Scientific Evidence

The global warming controversy also exists within the scientific community. Scientists agree that
the theory makes sense: increased
concentrations of greenhouse gases
within the atmosphere should cause
temperatures to rise (1). However,
they disagree about whether and
16

how global warming has occurred.

Scientists have a wide array of evidence to support the theory that man
has caused global warming. Firstly,
evidence from meteorological stations
that record the global mean temperature supports the claim that global
temperature has steadily risen since
1980. Scientists have also studied ice
cores to measure the amount of carbon
dioxide present in the atmosphere during a given year. By plotting the temperature information with the measurements of carbon dioxide, scientists
have found that the two have a positive
correlation. Both temperature and the
amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have steadily increased since
1980, causing many scientists to agree
that greater carbon dioxide emissions
cause the temperature to increase. (5)
In 2007, Nature published a recap of changes that had occurred since
2005. Within those two years, the rate
of polar ice melting increased, Antarctica weather balloons steadily warmed,
and the sea level rose (6). Earth scientists also point to evidence from the
natural climate change cycles of the
Earth. The Earth has gone through
many natural phases of climate change.
Until approximately 2.75 million years
ago, the climate changed every 23,000
years or so (7). After that, the intervals
between the climate changes increased
to todays interval of 100,000 years.
Again, the science world has reached
a consensus that with this evidence,
the Earth does appear to be warming.
However, the skeptics still assert that
man has not acted as the sole or primary factor causing global warming.
Skeptical scientists point to evidence to back their claim that man is
not the cause of global warming. These
skeptics believe that global warming
is a purely natural process. Skeptics
discount much of the evidence that
pro-global warming scientists have
put forth. They claim that some research units that provide the global
mean temperature series are hiding
data and falsifying scientific evidence
on global warming. More substantively, the skeptics also point out that
the temperature data does not cover
much of the worlds geography, and
the temperature data is negatively affected by urban expansion in what
is known as the heat island effect.

Skeptics also accuse climatologists who

predict future global warming of leaving out the impact of natural processes, which are not easy to predict. (8)
Another factor that affects both
groups opinions is the groups different
sources of funding. The skeptics tend to
be backed by industries that work with
fossil fuels. Fossil fuel industries do not
care so much about the debate as creating confusion amongst the public about
the topic of global warming. Thus,
while scientists generally agree that
the Earth is warming, they disagree
about the cause of global warming.
More research will be needed to assign
a definite cause to global warming. (1)

Global Warming as a
Boon and a Bane

With all the confusion surrounding the global warming debate, much
of the public only takes from the media that global warming will harm our
world. However, global warming has
potential benefits as well as drawbacks.
First of all, as the temperature
increases, the Earth will have a longer
growing season in many areas. In general, there will be less freezing weather,
and the increased temperatures and
carbon dioxide levels will allow more
plant growth. With more plant growth
and a longer growing season, there will
be more food for people and livestock.
The warmer weather will also positively
affect transportation. Airplanes, trains,
buses, and cars will stop having cold
weather-related delays for ice and snow.
Thus, contrary to popular belief, global
warming can have some benefits. (9)
Of course, global warming also
has many negative effects on the Earth.
Global warming is and will continue to
have dramatic effects on aquatic life and
biodiversity. To compound the natural
detrimental effects to ecosystems, humans may further disturb the ecosystems. For example, by trying to combat
the effects of rising sea levels, man may
work to maintain the coastline. In our
attempts to protect the coastline habitat,
other species may disappear. Increased
temperatures will also negatively affect
the food supply in many places, nullifying the benefits of a longer growing
season. The temperature increases will
bring hotter temperatures in the sum-

Dartmouth Undergraduate Journal of Science

mer, which may cause plants to die. It

could also cause weather patterns, such
as more intense floods and storms. (9)
In the future, global warming
could prove to be a boon and a bane to
the world, but it is impossible to estimate just how much of either it could be.

Water Vapor as a
Greenhouse Gas
Carbon dioxide is not the only
greenhouse gas contributing to global
warming; at high altitudes, water vapor also acts as a greenhouse gas, trapping heat on the Earths surface (10).
Water vapor acts as positive feedback
to the greenhouse gas phenomenon
because it prevents heat from leaving
the Earths atmosphere, just like carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide causes the
greenhouse effect, but water vapor is a
more serious problem because as the
temperature rises from the greenhouse
effect, more water is able to stay in its
gaseous form higher in the atmosphere
(10). Scientists have used computer
models to find that the water vapor intensifies the warming effects of carbon

FALL 2011

dioxide by at least a factor of two (11).

On the other hand, water vapor also
contributes the global cooling process
as it condenses and falls as rain when
too much of it exists lower in the atmosphere. It also blocks some of the
suns heat from reaching the Earth (11).
Overall, water vapor currently has a net
effect of keeping the Earth cooler even
though it acts as a greenhouse gas (11).

Conclusion
When trying to determine if global
warming is fact or fiction, we must take
into account evidence from all sides.
Plenty of evidence exists within the
science community, including skeptical opinions against global warming.
While the evidence points to the existence of global warming, the cause
is still widely disputed. Additionally,
the media reports on other sources of
evidence for global warming from different political groups. Ultimately, the
world still lacks a consensus on the
topic of global warming: its causes,
its presence, and its effects. However,
armed with the proper knowledge, we

can each decide for ourselves where we

stand in the global warming debate.
References:
1. P. Moriarty, D. Kennedy. Cybernet. Syst. 35,
723-725 (2004).
2. S. Weart, B. Atom. Sci. 67, 41-50 (2011).
3. J. Durfee, J. Corbett. Nieman Reports 59,
88-89 (2005).
4. S. Quiring, GeoJournal 70, 1-3 (2007).
5. G. A. Florides, P. Christodoulides. Environ.
Int. 35, 390-401 (2009).
6. P. Pockley, Australasian Science 28, 28-31
(2007).
7. J. Rose, P. Geologist. Assoc. 121, 334-341
(2010).
8. S. Wang, Chinese Sci. Bull. 55, 1961-1962
(2010).
9. T. Moore, EMBO Reports 9, S41-S45 (2008).
10. S. Sherwood, Australasian Science 30,
25-27 (2009).
11. R. Spencer, Social Science and Public
Policy 44, 45-50 (2007).

17