Aff 1ac pgms
Download 493.63 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Link Turns
XT: CO2 = WarmingCO2 causes warming Vardiman, 8 – Ph.D in Enviromental Studies (Larry, “Does Carbon Dioxide Drive Global Warming,” http://www.icr.org/article/does-carbon-dioxide-drive-global-warming/) JV Introduction In the latest of my series of articles on global warming, I offered evidence that global warming appears to be occurring, but evidence seems to be growing that fluctuations in the electromagnetic field of the sun may be responsible for it.1 Here I would like to expand my arguments that carbon dioxide from man's activities is probably not the primary cause for global warming. Major weaknesses have developed in the logic that carbon dioxide causes global warming. In a second article to follow, I will describe a new theory of climate change based on the influence of the sun. Arguments against Carbon Dioxide Driving Global Warming In his presentation An Inconvenient Truth,2 Al Gore argues that the correlation between earth's average global temperature and the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere irrefutably demonstrates that carbon dioxide drives global warming. He compares the temperature trend in the so-called "Hockey Stick Diagram" with the exponential increase in carbon dioxide measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, for the past 50 years. A similar plot of temperature over the past 1,000 years is shown in Figure 1. Such a diagram is given this name because the temperature plot looks like a long-handled hockey stick. This figure shows a superposition of average global temperature curves obtained by different research groups using different data and/or methodologies. For example, the red curve shows the results obtained by Moberg et al,3 while the blue curve shows the results of Esper et al.4 The average temperature in the "handle" of the hockey stick over the period from about 1000 to 1850 A.D. remains relatively uniform, followed by a sudden rise in the "blade" since 1850, supposedly following the recent increase in carbon dioxide. Figure 1 seems to provide compelling evidence that global warming is caused by an increase in carbon dioxide. The sudden steep rise in temperature following a long period of uniform temperature prior to the Industrial Age seems to be inextricably linked to man's activities since 1850 or so. However, when one examines the figure more carefully, the argument begins to fall apart. Link TurnsNo fights over the plan – support of powerful states CSM, 10 (4/16, The Christian Science Monitor, “NASA and Obama’s budget: the politics and ideals of human space exploration,” http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2010/0416/NASA-and-Obama-s-budget-the-politics-and-ideals-of-human-space-exploration, mat) Human travel to Mars is now back on America’s space agenda. It is just one of many course-corrections that President Obama will likely be forced to make to his January proposals for big changes at NASA. Too many Americans and lawmakers reacted negatively to the initial White House plan for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. They still see human exploration to specific destinations in space as a compelling frontier – not just for the nation but humanity, too. They weren’t ready to live only vague promises of deep-space missions, as Mr. Obama made. Nor do they want the space agency more focused on earthly tasks such as climate-change monitoring, as Obama would prefer, over scientific discovery in outer space. The public reaction pushed the president on Thursday to set a timetable for the first Mars trip – by the mid-2030s – as well as a schedule to land on an asteroid (near 2025). He also had to set 2015 for starting construction of a heavy-lift launcher based on new innovative technology. But Obama only partially backed down on his proposal to cancel a Bush-era program called Constellation. That project, now over budget, would return Americans to the moon to do more research and to tap that body’s frozen water for making fuel for lunar launches to Mars and beyond. While he still wants to stop production of the Ares rockets for the moon mission, Obama did backpedal a bit by offering to keep the planned Orion crew-ship – but only as an emergency vehicle to escape the International Space Station. Even Neil Armstrong, the first human on the moon, opposes an end to the moon project, partly because other nations, especially China, are gearing up to land there in the years ahead. America’s leadership in space would be in jeopardy. The political battle over funding the moon project will play out in Congress over coming months. Some compromise may be possible. This debate will likely have little of the polarizing partisan tones of other issues on Capitol Hill. Rather, it pits key political states with many space-related jobs – Florida, Texas, California, and Colorado – against other states. To his credit, the president would raise NASA’s overall budget by about $6 billion over five years – despite his call for cuts during his 2008 campaign. And he wants to support the fledgling private space agency to take over many of the government’s goals for low-orbit projects, such as reaching the space station. He also would extend the space station’s life by four years. Finding a political middle that can support NASA’s program through many presidencies would be Obama’s biggest legacy in space. The agency and the private contractors can keep suffering financial whiplash every few years, as they did once again when Obama laid out his goals last January. One of those potential middle positions was articulated well by Obama on Thursday: “Our goal is the capacity for people to work and learn, operate and live safely beyond the Earth for extended periods of time.” The president erred by not working more closely with Congress before setting forth his budget plan for NASA. He also may be counting too much on the commercial space-launch industry to mature soon enough to take over key NASA functions and fill the gap – to be temporarily filled by Russian rockets – caused by the end of the space shuttle program this fall. He’s on course, however, when he clearly lines himself up with America’s strong tradition in spaceflight, as he did Thursday in speaking at the Kennedy Space Center: “Space exploration is not a luxury, not an afterthought in America’s brighter future, [but] an essential part of that quest.... For pennies on the dollar, the space program has improved our lives, advanced our society, strengthened our economy, and inspired generations.” Bipartisan support for NASA – no political infighting Foust, 3 (8/18/2003, Jeff, The Space Review, “The gaps in NASA’s support,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/41/2, mat) It’s long been assumed that support for NASA in the United States is widespread. From a political standpoint, NASA enjoys a degree of bipartisan support (or, perhaps more accurately at times, bipartisan neglect) not seen in many other government agencies. A typical NASA program is less likely to become a political football for one party or the other than programs at the Defense Department, EPA, or even the Department of Education. Along the same lines, NASA appears to have widespread support from the American people as a whole. While there is a fraction of the public is always critical of the space agency (a fraction that tends to fluctuate depending on NASA’s publicized successes or failures), it’s never seemed obvious that this opposition to NASA is polarized along political, racial, income, or other lines. Upon closer examination, however, that belief is not necessarily true. In late June and early July Zogby International conducted a poll for the Houston Chronicle regarding the American public’s opinions about NASA, the space shuttle, and other programs the agency is undertaking. The Chronicle published those results in its July 21 issue, focusing on the overall numbers. Those results showed that the American public, in general, remained supportive of NASA despite the Columbia accident and its aftermath. A majority of those polled, though, thought that the shuttle should remain grounded until the space program is redefined in some fashion. The Chronicle, to its benefit, provided not just a written summary of the poll results, but the full final report submitted by Zogby. The Chronicle also included the “crosstabs”, a detailed breakdown of the poll results, question by question. The crosstabs include data on how different segments of the population—broken down by age, race, gender, education, income, political preference, and more—answered the questions. It’s these data that reveal that NASA’s support, as well as support Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 493.63 Kb. Share with your friends:
|