Impact File – Warming Good
1/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
IMPACT FILE – WARMING GOOD
Impact File – Warming Good .................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Warming Good Frontline – 1NC/2AC/1AR .............................................................................................................................................. 2
Warming Good Frontline – 2NC ............................................................................................................................................................... 3
Warming Good Ext 1/2 – 2NC/1NR .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Warming Good Ext 2/2 – 2NC/1NR .......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Ice Age Brink ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 6
Ice Age Links ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Ice Age Impact – Extinction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Ice Age Impact – Diseases ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Ice Age Impact – Econ ............................................................................................................................................................................. 11
Ice Age Impact – Species Loss ................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Ice Age Impact – Super Volcanoes .......................................................................................................................................................... 13
Ice Age – AT: Solar Cycle Theory False ................................................................................................................................................. 14
Ice Age – AT: Polar Precipitation ............................................................................................................................................................ 15
Warming Good – Systemic ...................................................................................................................................................................... 16
Warming Defense – Generic .................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Warming Defense – Coral Reefs ............................................................................................................................................................. 18
Warming Defense – Ice Age (Gulf Stream) ............................................................................................................................................. 19
Warming Defense – Ice Age (North Atlantic Current) ............................................................................................................................ 20
Warming Defense – Oceans ..................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Warming Defense – War ......................................................................................................................................................................... 22
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
2/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING GOOD FRONTLINE – 1NC/2AC/1AR
On the warming debate –
Warming is good - its key to extend our current interglacial period
Shaffer, 09 (Gary Shaffer – professor in the Planet and Geophysics department of the Niels Bohr Institute of University of Copenhagen, Director of the Danish
Center for Earth System Science, senior scientist at Department of Geophysics, University of Concepcion, Chile, 11 February 2009, “Long time management of fossil
fuel resources to limit global warming and avoid ice age onsets,” Geophysical Research Letters Vol. 36, L03704, doi:10.1029/2008GL036294, CM)
[1] There are about 5000 billion tons of fossil fuel carbon in accessible reserves. Combustion of all this carbon within the next few centuries would force high
atmospheric CO2 content and extreme global warming. On the other hand, low atmospheric CO2 content favors the onset of an ice age when changes in the Earth’s
orbit lead to low summer insolation at high northern latitudes. Here I present Earth System Model projections showing that typical reduction targets for fossil fuel use in
the present century could limit ongoing global warming to less than one degree Celcius above present. Furthermore, the projections show that combustion
pulses of remaining fossil fuel reserves could then be tailored to raise atmospheric CO2 content high and long enough to parry
forcing of ice age onsets by summer insolation minima far into the future. Our present interglacial period could be extended by
about 500,000 years in this way. Citation: Shaffer, G. (2009), Long time management of fossil fuel resources to limit global warming and avoid ice age onsets,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L03704, doi:10.1029/2008GL036294. 1. Introduction [2] Most of the ongoing global warming is very likely forced by anthropogenic
greenhouse gases, in particular CO2 from fossil fuel combustion [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC), 2007]. Natural processes remove this CO2 from
the atmosphere on time scales of decades to hundreds of thousands of years [Archer, 2005; Lenton and Britton, 2006]. This has several important implications. First, if
large amounts of CO2 are introduced too rapidly into the atmosphere, high atmospheric CO2 content and extreme global warming result [Montenegro et al., 2007;
Schmittner et al., 2008]. Second, slow natural uptake of anthropogenic CO2 means that warming would continue for thousands of years after a CO2 injection into the
atmosphere. But this also implies that management of CO2 input to the atmosphere could provide an effective means for long term climate
regulation and could be used to extend the present interglacial even longer than expected for current weak eccentricity of the Earth’s
orbit [Loutre and Berger, 2000]. [3] Ice ages start when conditions at high northern latitudes allow winter snowfall to persist over the summer for enough years to
accumulate and build ice sheets. Such conditions are usually attributed to minima of summer solar insolation at high northern latitudes from changes in the eccentricity,
obliquity and precession of the Earth’s orbit [Ruddiman, 2003]. However, other factors like atmospheric greenhouse gas levels and biosphere-related albedo
feedbacks have also been found to be important for ice sheet inception [Berger et al., 1999; Ruddiman, 2003; Vettoretti and Peltier, 2004; Calov and
Ganopolski, 2005; Crucifix et al., 2006]. In one coupled climate model study, obliquity forcing was most important for inception followed by forcing of about equal
importance by eccentricity-precession and atmospheric CO2 [Vettoretti and Peltier, 2004]. Critical summer mean (June 21–July 20) insolation at 65N for ice sheet
nucleation was significantly lower for higher CO2 partial pressure (pCO2) in projections with the coupled climate-ice sheet Climber-2 model using constant obliquity
but variable precession [Archer and Ganopolski, 2005]. [4] Here I force the low-order, DCESS Earth System Model [Shaffer et al., 2008] with three fossil fuel emission
scenarios to obtain three long term (>100,000 year) projections of atmospheric pCO2 and of global warming. These projections are used together with the Climber-2
results to diagnose ice age onsets. The third of the emission scenarios is tailored to limit immediate global warming while avoiding ice age onsets as long as possible for
available fossil fuel reserves.
AND The impact is extinction by 2028 – ice age is comparatively worse than warming
Chapman 8 (Phil, Geophysicist, Former NASA Astronaut, “Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh,” The Austrailian, 4-34,
http://www.sciencealert.com.au/opinions/20082105-17356.html)
It is time to put aside the global warming dogma , at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another
little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850. There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and
much more harmful than anything warming may do . There are many more people now and we have become dependent on a few
temperate agricultural areas, especially in the US and Canada. Global warming would increase agricultural output, but global cooling
will decrease it. Millions will starve if we do nothing to prepare for it (such as planning changes in agriculture to compensate), and millions more will
die from cold-related diseases. There is also another possibility, remote but much more serious. The Greenland and Antarctic ice cores and other evidence show
that for the past several million years, severe glaciation has almost always afflicted our planet. The bleak truth is that, under normal conditions, most of North America
and Europe are buried under about 1.5km of ice. This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000
years. The interglacial we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so the ice is overdue. We also know
that glaciation can occur quickly : the required decline in global temperature is about 12C and it can happen in 20 years. The next descent into an ice age is
inevitable but may not happen for another 1,000 years. On the other hand, it must be noted that the cooling in 2007 was even faster than in typical glacial transitions. If
it continued for 20 years, the temperature would be 14C cooler in 2027. By then, most of the advanced nations would have ceased to
exist, vanishing under the ice, and the rest of the world would be faced with a catastrophe beyond imagining. Australia may escape total annihilation but would
surely be overrun by millions of refugees. Once the glaciation starts, it will last 1000 centuries, an incomprehensible stretch of time.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
3/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING GOOD FRONTLINE – 2NC
On the warming debate –
First, don’t sit around waiting for a bad sunburn to kill us – climate change is slow enough that we’ll adapt to it
Tennekes 8 (Hendrick, former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, Jul 15,
http://climaterealists.com/index.php/forum/?id=1554)
“Fortunately, the time rate of climate change is slow compared to the rapid evolution of our institutions and societies. There is
sufficient time for adaptation. We should monitor the situation both globally and locally, but up to now global climate change does not cause
severe problems requiring immediate emission reductions. Successive IPCC reports have presented no scientific basis for dire
warnings concerning climate collapse. Local and regional problems with shorter time scales deserve priority. They can be managed professionally, just
as the Dutch seem to do.” The so-called scientific basis of the climate problem is within my professional competence as a meteorologist. It is my professional
opinion that there is no evidence at all for catastrophic global warming. It is likely that global temperatures will rise a little, much as
IPCC predicts, but there is a growing body of evidence that the errant behavior of the Sun may cause some cooling in the foreseeable future.
Second, warming is good - its key to extend our current interglacial period
Shaffer, 09 (Gary Shaffer – professor in the Planet and Geophysics department of the Niels Bohr Institute of University of Copenhagen, Director of the Danish
Center for Earth System Science, senior scientist at Department of Geophysics, University of Concepcion, Chile, 11 February 2009, “Long time management of fossil
fuel resources to limit global warming and avoid ice age onsets,” Geophysical Research Letters Vol. 36, L03704, doi:10.1029/2008GL036294, CM)
[1] There are about 5000 billion tons of fossil fuel carbon in accessible reserves. Combustion of all this carbon within the next few centuries would force high
atmospheric CO2 content and extreme global warming. On the other hand, low atmospheric CO2 content favors the onset of an ice age when changes in the Earth’s
orbit lead to low summer insolation at high northern latitudes. Here I present Earth System Model projections showing that typical reduction targets for fossil fuel use in
the present century could limit ongoing global warming to less than one degree Celcius above present. Furthermore, the projections show that combustion
pulses of remaining fossil fuel reserves could then be tailored to raise atmospheric CO2 content high and long enough to parry
forcing of ice age onsets by summer insolation minima far into the future. Our present interglacial period could be extended by
about 500,000 years in this way. Citation: Shaffer, G. (2009), Long time management of fossil fuel resources to limit global warming and avoid ice age onsets, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
36, L03704, doi:10.1029/2008GL036294. 1. Introduction [2] Most of the ongoing global warming is very likely forced by anthropogenic greenhouse gases, in particular CO2 from fossil fuel
combustion [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC), 2007]. Natural processes remove this CO2 from the atmosphere on time scales of decades to hundreds of thousands of years
[Archer, 2005; Lenton and Britton, 2006]. This has several important implications. First, if large amounts of CO2 are introduced too rapidly into the atmosphere, high atmospheric CO2 content
and extreme global warming result [Montenegro et al., 2007; Schmittner et al., 2008]. Second, slow natural uptake of anthropogenic CO2 means that warming would continue for thousands of
years after a CO2 injection into the atmosphere. But this also implies that management of CO2 input to the atmosphere could provide an effective means for long term climate regulation and
could be used to extend the present interglacial even longer than expected for current weak eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit [Loutre and Berger, 2000]. [3] Ice ages start when conditions at high
northern latitudes allow winter snowfall to persist over the summer for enough years to accumulate and build ice sheets. Such conditions are usually attributed to minima of summer solar
insolation at high northern latitudes from changes in the eccentricity, obliquity and precession of the Earth’s orbit [Ruddiman, 2003]. However, other factors like atmospheric greenhouse gas
levels and biosphere-related albedo feedbacks have also been found to be important for ice sheet inception [Berger et al., 1999; Ruddiman, 2003; Vettoretti and Peltier, 2004; Calov and
Ganopolski, 2005; Crucifix et al., 2006]. In one coupled climate model study, obliquity forcing was most important for inception followed by forcing of about equal importance by eccentricityprecession and atmospheric CO2 [Vettoretti and Peltier, 2004]. Critical summer mean (June 21–July 20) insolation at 65N for ice sheet nucleation was significantly lower for higher CO2
partial pressure (pCO2) in projections with the coupled climate-ice sheet Climber-2 model using constant obliquity but variable precession [Archer and Ganopolski, 2005]. [4] Here I force the
low-order, DCESS Earth System Model [Shaffer et al., 2008] with three fossil fuel emission scenarios to obtain three long term (>100,000 year) projections of atmospheric pCO2 and of global
warming. These projections are used together with the Climber-2 results to diagnose ice age onsets. The third of the emission scenarios is tailored to limit immediate global warming while
avoiding ice age onsets as long as possible for available fossil fuel reserves.
AND The impact is extinction by 2028 – ice age is comparatively worse than warming
Chapman 8 (Phil, Geophysicist, Former NASA Astronaut, “Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh,” The Austrailian, 4-34,
http://www.sciencealert.com.au/opinions/20082105-17356.html)
It is time to put aside the global warming dogma , at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another
little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850. There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and
much more harmful than anything warming may do . There are many more people now and we have become dependent on a few
temperate agricultural areas, especially in the US and Canada. Global warming would increase agricultural output, but global cooling
will decrease it. Millions will starve if we do nothing to prepare for it (such as planning changes in agriculture to compensate), and millions more will
die from cold-related diseases. There is also another possibility, remote but much more serious. The Greenland and Antarctic ice cores and other evidence show
that for the past several million years, severe glaciation has almost always afflicted our planet. The bleak truth is that, under normal conditions, most of North America
and Europe are buried under about 1.5km of ice. This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000
years. The interglacial we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so the ice is overdue. We also know
that glaciation can occur quickly : the required decline in global temperature is about 12C and it can happen in 20 years. The next descent into an ice age is
inevitable but may not happen for another 1,000 years. On the other hand, it must be noted that the cooling in 2007 was even faster than in typical glacial transitions. If
it continued for 20 years, the temperature would be 14C cooler in 2027. By then, most of the advanced nations would have ceased to
exist, vanishing under the ice, and the rest of the world would be faced with a catastrophe beyond imagining. Australia may escape total annihilation but would
surely be overrun by millions of refugees. Once the glaciation starts, it will last 1000 centuries, an incomprehensible stretch of time.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
4/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING GOOD EXT 1/2 – 2NC/1NR
On the warming debate –
Extend our ice age turn – increasing emissions is key to stop the next ice ace – that’s Shaffer. And that ice age causes extinction
by 2028 – glaciation is comparatively faster than their warming impacts – that’s Chapman. This both non-uniques and turns
their impact.
Next, Chapman also says that an ice age would cause global food shortages – that independently causes World War 3
William Calvin 98, theoretical neurophysiologist at the University of Washington, Atlantic Monthly, January, The Great Climate Flip-Flop, Vol 281, No. 1, , p. 47-64
The population-crash scenario is surely the most appalling. Plummeting crop yields would cause some powerful countries to try to take over their
neighbors or distant lands -- if only because their armies, unpaid and lacking food, would go marauding, both at home and across the
borders. The better-organized countries would attempt to use their armies, before they fell apart entirely, to take over countries with significant remaining resources,
driving out or starving their inhabitants if not using modern weapons to accomplish the same end: eliminating competitors for the remaining food. This would be a
worldwide problem -- and could lead to a Third World War -- but Europe's vulnerability is particularly easy to analyze. The last abrupt cooling, the
Younger Dryas, drastically altered Europe's climate as far east as Ukraine. Present-day Europe has more than 650 million people. It has excellent soils, and largely
grows its own food. It could no longer do so if it lost the extra warming from the North Atlantic.
AND Our turns outweigh the warming impacts –
First, we’re the only ones reading evidence comparative between an ice age and their apocalyptic warming scenarios –
Chapman concludes neg that an ice age is both faster and has a greater chance of causing extinction.
Second, don’t sit around waiting for a bad sunburn to kill us – climate change is slow enough that we’ll adapt to it
Tennekes 8 (Hendrick, former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, Jul 15,
http://climaterealists.com/index.php/forum/?id=1554)
“Fortunately, the time rate of climate change is slow compared to the rapid evolution of our institutions and societies. There is
sufficient time for adaptation. We should monitor the situation both globally and locally, but up to now global climate change does not cause
severe problems requiring immediate emission reductions. Successive IPCC reports have presented no scientific basis for dire
warnings concerning climate collapse. Local and regional problems with shorter time scales deserve priority. They can be managed professionally, just
as the Dutch seem to do.” The so-called scientific basis of the climate problem is within my professional competence as a meteorologist. It is my professional
opinion that there is no evidence at all for catastrophic global warming. It is likely that global temperatures will rise a little, much as
IPCC predicts, but there is a growing body of evidence that the errant behavior of the Sun may cause some cooling in the foreseeable future.
Third, an ice age is the ONLY scenario for extinction – warming will be beneficial, history proves
Forbes, 10 (Viv Forbes – Chairman of The Carbon Sense Coalition, 4 February 2010, “New tax inevitable in the Libs' alternative ETS,” The Advertiser, Australia,
pg. 20, lexis, CM)
There is no evidence that carbon dioxide drives temperature changes on Earth. And even
if the world did warm, there is no evidence that this would
be harmful to life on Earth. Ice ages cause mass extinctions; warm periods are always bountiful. Moreover, higher temperature
must produce higher evaporation from the oceans and thus more rainfall. If this is combined with more abundant carbon dioxide,
the aerial plant food, Earth would have another green revolution. The war on carbon dioxide has been heavily promoted by European interests
dependent on ageing and costly nuclear power and unreliable Russian gas. Their goal is to hobble those competitors reliant on efficient and dependable coal power,
chiefly the Anglo-American world and Australia's major customers in China and India. Many foolish local politicians have thus become foreign agents.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
5/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING GOOD EXT 2/2 – 2NC/1NR
Third, empirically warming has ONLY been beneficial to the environment – it increases forest growth which stabilizes
biodiversity
McMahon et al 10 (Sean M. McMahon- postdoctoral fellow from Smithsonian Tropical Research Insititute’s Center for Tropical
Forest Science, 3 February 2010, “Evidence for a recent increase in forest growth,” published online for Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, http://www.pnas.org/content/107/8/3611.full?sid=03d5a654-605b-4a3c-ba27-453b95c8afbf)
Forests and their soils contain the majority of the earth’s terrestrial carbon stocks. Changes in patterns of tree growth
can have a huge impact on
atmospheric cycles, biogeochemical cycles, climate change, and biodiversity. Recent studies have shown increases in biomass across
many forest types. This increase has been attributed to climate change. However, without knowing the disturbance history of a forest, growth could
also be caused by normal recovery from unknown disturbances. Using a unique dataset of tree biomass collected over the past 22 years from 55 temperate forest plots
with known land-use histories and stand ages ranging from 5 to 250 years, we found that recent biomass accumulation greatly exceeded the expected growth caused by
natural recovery. We have also collected over 100 years of local weather measurements and 17 years of on-site atmospheric CO2 measurements that show
consistent increases in line with globally observed climate-change patterns. Combined, these observations show that changes in temperature and CO2 that have been observed
worldwide can fundamentally alter the rate of critical natural processes, which is predicted by biogeochemical models. Identifying this rate change is important to research on the current state of carbon stocks and the fluxes
that influence how carbon moves between storage and the atmosphere. These results signal a pressing need to better understand the changes in growth rates in forest systems, which influence current and future states of the
atmosphere and biosphere. biomass change | carbon cycle | carbon fertilization | climate change | forest stand dynamics The movement of carbon in our atmosphere, oceans, and terrestrial ecosystems is critical to predicting
how climate change may influence the natural systems on which humans rely (1–4). Changes in ecosystems can, in turn, feed back into global atmospheric cycles through evapotranspiration, net ecosystem CO2 exchange,
and surface albedo and roughness, which complicates predictions about future climate states (1, 5–7). Key evidence that global changes may affect the functioning of forests is shown in changes in forest biomass over time,
which can have important implications for whether or not forests accumulate biomass at a rate that would alter current trends of atmospheric carbon cycling (8). In densely forested regions across the globe, forests can recover
rapidly from agricultural fields, logged stands, or areas cleared because of natural disturbances as long as remnant patches or seed banks remain. Across forest types, the period of recovery consists of a rapid rise in aboveground biomass (AGB) followed by a leveling off as the canopy fills in and biomass shifts from the sum of many small stems to fewer, larger canopy trees. The rate and asymptote of this pattern of biomass recovery can
differ across stands because of nutrient availability and species composition or can differ between regions because of climate and disturbance regimens; however, the functional form of this response remains similar across
forest types and regions (9, 10). There are indications that forest biomass accumulation may be accelerating where nutrients and water are not limiting (11–17). Distinguishing changes in forest dynamics caused by climate
change from those changes caused by long-term stand recovery from disturbance, soil variables, species composition, and climate history is difficult (12, 18–20). We were able to use a unique dataset that combines census
data and stand-age data, from which we estimated biomass change, while controlling for stand regeneration. Our biomass estimates were gathered over varying census intervals for 55 plots in a temperate deciduous forest in
and near the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) in Edgewater, MD (38°53′18″N, 76°33′15″W). Plot sizes ranged from 75 to 15,625 m2 (median = 1,000 m2). Stand age was estimated from tree-core
measurements and land-use history. From these data, we compared the expected rate of biomass accumulation caused by the ensemble response of stands to disturbance with recent growth rates derived from the census data.
These stands contain similar species compositions (Materials and Methods) and differ only slightly in soils and topography. All plots have documented histories of agricultural use. The Monod function effectively describes
the increase in biomass of forests during recovery and thus, is appropriate to model patterns of resource use and limitation (10). The function for stand biomass in megagrams per hectare (Mg ha-1) for stand i is (Eq. 1): AGBi
¼ β0 þ β1 SAi SAi þ θ
; [1] where β0 + β1 is the asymptote for the maximum biomass that a stand can achieve, SAi is the age of the stand, and θ is the age at halfsaturation of the function. We estimated the parameters β0, β1, and θ across the plots using hierarchical Bayesian methods (modified from ref. 21). We estimated biomass using species-specific algorithms relating diameter at
breast height (DBH) to total AGB. Stand age was estimated from tree-ring counts of cores of the 10 largest trees immediately outside of the stand-plot boundary (see ref. 22 for detailed methods) and historical photographs of
the stand sites (Materials and Methods). Fig. 1 shows the fit of Eq. 1 for 55 sites in red and 50 sampled curves from the posterior distributions of the estimated parameters in light blue. The blue lines highlight variation in
parameter fits and not process error, which is larger and encompasses all plots. This is intended to show uncertainty in expectation of growth rates, which are defined as the tangent of these lines, but not intended to show if
some sites have overall different biomass estimates than the mean. For sites that had multiple censuses, we used mean biomass at the mean stand age of those censuses to estimate function parameters. Results and Discussion
The Monod function in Eq. 1 gives the expected ensemble-growth trajectory. The derivative of Eq. 1 [β1 × θ/(SAi + θ)2], then provides a point estimate of expected annual biomass change given the age of a stand and the
values of β1 and θ; 37 of 55 sites had more than one measurement taken between 1987 and 2005. To get annual biomass changes for a stand age, we divided the difference in biomass between census dates by the interval
length. Using the mean stand age of each census interval from the β1 and θ parameters estimated from the ensemble data, we calculated the expected annual biomass change with error from posterior draws of the parameter
estimates. Fig. 2A shows the census changes overlaid on the median ensemble estimate (red curve). Logged axes are used for clarity. Fig. 2B compares the observed biomass changes with those expected from the ensemble
curve. In 78% of the annual growth estimates, the observed AGB change between censuses exceeded the higher confidence bound of the estimated rate (in a binomial test, P < 0.0001). Tree death is the only way biomass can
decrease in a plot, and therefore, a negative rate cannot be used to assess changes in growth. When census intervals were only considered if there was positive growth (growth without deaths of large trees), 90% of intervals
showed greater than expected growth (Fig. 2B). Plots with positive growth show an average annual rate increase of 4.15 Mg ha-1 (confidence bounds of 3.55 and 4.74) above their expected increase given stand age. This
increase was independent of stand age (P > 0.1) and the year of the census (P > 0.1). These high biomass-rate increases across stand age must be a recent phenomenon. Extrapolating observed annual growth rates backward
would lead either to dramatically lower than estimated stand ages or unrealistic biomass gain functions. Many potential mechanisms can influence the rate of biomass change. Table 1 lists six hypotheses that might explain the
difference between the observed and expected values that we found. Increases in temperature, growing season, and atmospheric CO2 have documented influences on tree physiology, metabolism, and growth, and likely, they
Temperature is critical to all metabolic processes involved in uptake, release, and
temperatures, especially when coinciding with adequate precipitation and without resource limitation, can increase tree
metabolic processes that, in turn, lead to higher biomass accumulation (6, 23). Temperate forest trees have shown a broader range of temperatures for optimal
are critical to changing the rate of stand growth observed across stands. Increased Temperature.
storage of carbon. Rising
photosynthesis than have tropical forests, and they can likely respond quickly to increased temperatures (24). Observational studies correlating temperature to diameter growth across forest types have shown both increases
(15, 25) and decreases (26, 27) in response to higher temperatures. Decreases are likely caused by water limitation of photosynthesis, which is not the case at the SERC stands. Mean and maximum temperatures near SERC
Higher temperatures are also correlated with longer growing seasons (Fig. 3B). A
steady lengthening of the growing season has been documented worldwide (7), and even a shift in the seasonal phase of surface temperatures has
been detected (28). Growing degree days correlate with the speed of forest recovery from pasture in the Amazon (9, 29) and increased plant growth in boreal forests
have shown consistent long-term increases (Fig. 3A). Increased Growing Season.
(11, 25). Fig. 3B shows that last frosts of winter have come earlier and first frosts of fall have come later in the SERC region over the last century, significantly increasing the length of the growing season. Increased CO2.
Atmospheric CO2 can increase tree growth through carbon fertilization (30). Trees have shown species specific increases in growth
under elevated CO2, but nutrient and water limitation can mitigate growth (31). Measurements of CO2 from SERC match the increases observed from annual averages on Mauna Loa (Fig. 3C). Higher
atmospheric CO2 levels can also cause higher temperatures and longer growing seasons (1, 5, 8). Interactions and feedbacks are expected to drive growth when
nutrients, such as N or P, and water are not limiting.
Solves extinction.
Diner ‘94—Major David, Judge Advocate General’s Corps, United States Army, Military Law Review, Winter, 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161
Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more
stable than less diverse systems. "The more complex the ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. . . . [l]ike a net, in which each knot is
connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks down as a
whole." n79 By causing widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so does
the risk of ecosystem failure. The spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States are relatively mild examples
of what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically, each new animal or plant extinction, with all its dimly perceived and intertwined affects,
could cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction. Each new extinction increases the risk of disaster. Like a mechanic
removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, n80 [hu]mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
6/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING GOOD EXT – 1AR
On the warming debate –
Extend our ice age turn – increasing emissions is key to stop the next ice ace – that’s Shaffer. And that ice age causes extinction
by 2028 – glaciation is comparatively faster than their warming impacts – that’s Chapman. This both non-uniques and turns
their impact.
AND Our turns outweigh the warming impacts –
First, we’re the only ones reading evidence comparative between an ice age and their apocalyptic warming scenarios –
Chapman concludes neg that an ice age is both faster and has a greater chance of causing extinction.
Second, don’t sit around waiting for a bad sunburn to kill us – climate change is slow enough that we’ll always win the
timeframe debate.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
7/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE BRINK
Now is key to prepare for the ice age – it’ll be here in 5 years, we must continue to promote global warming
Scepanovic, 10 (Ivo Scepanovic – prolific and highly credited journalist – has written for The Times, The Sunday Times, The Sunday Telegraph, Daily Express,
and more and has interviewed Yitzak Shamir, H.H. the Dalai Lama, David Copperfield and other high profile subjects, 12 February 2010, “Europe 'Five Years from
New Ice Age'; Scientist Warns Really Big Freeze is on Way,” The Mirror, lexis, CM)
A LEADING weather scientist has claimed Europe could be just five years away from the start of a new Ice Age . While climate change
campaigners say global warming is the planet's biggest danger, physicist Vladimir Paar says most of central Europe will soon be covered in ice . And
people will be able to literally walk between Ireland and England - or across the North Sea from Scotland to northern Europe. Professor Paar, from Croatia's Zagreb
University, has spent decades analysing previous ice ages in Europe. "Most of Europe will be under ice, including Germany, Poland, France,
Austria, Slovakia and Slovenia," the professor said in an interview with Croatian news website Index. "Previous ice ages lasted about 70,000 years. That's a fact
and the new Ice Age can't be avoided. "The big question is what will happen to the people of European countries which are under ice? "They might migrate to the south,
or might stay, but with a huge increase in energy use. "This could happen in five, 10, 50 or 100 years, or even later. We can't predict it precisely, but it will come." The
last Ice Age was 20,000 years ago, when most of North America and Europe were covered by large sheets of ice. The professor added: "The reality is that
mankind needs to start preparing for the ice age. We are at the end of the global warming period. The ice age is to follow. The global
warming period should have ended thousands of years ago, we should already be in the ice age. Therefore we do not know precisely
when it could start - but soon." Professor Parr said scientists think global warming is simply a natural element of the planet's make-up. He said:
"Some 130,000 years ago the Earth's temperature was the same as now, the level of CO2 was almost the same and the level of the sea was four metres higher. "They
keep warning people about global warming, but half of America no longer believes it as they keep freezing."
Regional weather patterns prove ice age is coming
Caruba 2008 (Alan, Yearbook of Experts, Feb 19)
If you have been paying attention to global weather reports, you know that China has had the heaviest snowfall in at least three decades. David Deming,
a geophysicist, in a December 19, 2007 article in The Washington Times, noted that, "South America this year experienced one of its coldest winters in
decades. In Buenos Aires, snow fell for the first time since the year 1918." This occurred across the entire Southern Hemisphere.
"Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia experienced the coldest June ever." It must be said that one big blizzard does
not an Ice Age make, but a whole series of events that suggest a cooling cycle may well be the warning that is being ignored in the
midst of the vast global warming hoax.
Stock up on fur coats – the ice age will begin by 2012
Caruba 2008 (Alan, Yearbook of Experts, Feb 19)
Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, Merited Scientist of Russia and fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, is staff researcher of the Oceanology Institute. He recently
published a commentary asserting that a global cold spell could replace global warming . Note that the Earth has been warming-about one degree
Fahrenheit-since the last mini-Ice Age ended around 1850. "The real reasons for climate change are uneven solar radiation", said Dr. Sorokhtin, while citing others that
include the Earth's axis gyration and instability of oceanic currents. "Astrophysics knows two solar activity cycles, of 11 and 200 years. Both are caused by changes in
the radius and area of the irradiating solar surface." Yes, the Sun itself goes through periods of change. Dr. Sorokhtin believes that "Earth has passed the peak
of its warmer period and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012 . Real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by
2041, and will last for 50-60 years or even longer." There is a reason scientists refer to our era as an "interglacial period", i.e., a time between Ice Ages. We are at the
end of an 11,500 cycle.
Ice age is coming – decreased solar activity and geological evidence proves.
Rebecca Sato, 2008 (“The sunspot enigma”, The Daily Galaxy, June 11 th 2008,
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/06/the-sunspot-mys.html, accessed on 6-30-08)
If the
world does face another mini Ice Age, it could come without warning. Evidence for abrupt climate change is readily found in ice cores
taken from Greenland and Antarctica. One of the best known examples of such an event is the Younger Dryas cooling, which occurred about 12,000
years ago, named after the arctic wildflower found in northern European sediments. This event began and ended rather abruptly, and for its entire 1000
year duration the North Atlantic region was about 5°C colder. Could something like this happen again? There’s no way to tell, and because the
changes can happen all within one decade—we might not even see it coming. The Younger Dryas occurred at a time when orbital forcing should have
"This is the fastest temperature change in the instrumental record, and it puts us back to where we were in 1930," Dr Chapman noted in The Australian recently.
continued to drive climate to the present warm state. The unexplained phenomenon has been the topic of much intense scientific debate, as well as other millennial scale
events. Now this 11-year low in Sunspot activity has raised fears among a small but growing number of scientists that rather than
getting warmer, the Earth could possibly be about to return to another cooling period. The idea is especially intriguing considering that most of the
world is in preparation for global warming. Canadian scientist Kenneth Tapping of the National Research Council has also noted that solar activity has entered into an
unusually inactive phase, but what that means—if anything—is still anyone’s guess. Another solar scientist, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of
Natural Sciences, however, is certain that it’s an indication of a coming cooling period. Sorokhtin believes that a lack of sunspots does
indicate a coming cooling period based on certain past trends and early records. In fact, he calls manmade climate change "a drop in
the bucket" compared to the fierce and abrupt cold that can potentially be brought on by inactive solar phases. Sorokhtin’s advice:
"Stock up on fur coats"…just in case.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
8/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE LINKS
Status quo emissions mean permanent warmth – that solves the next ice age
Berger and Loutre 2002 [Andre and MF, professors @ Universite catholique de Louvain, “An exceptionally long interglacial ahead?”, SCIENCE, August]
On a geological time scale, climate cycles are believed to be driven by changes in insulation (solar radiation received at the top of the
atmosphere) as a result of variations in Earth's orbit around the Sun. Over the next 100,000 years, the amplitude of insulation
variations will be small (see the figure), much smaller than during the Eemian. For example, at 65 deg N in June, insulation will vary
by less than 25 Wmz over the next 25,000 years, compared with 110 Wm^sup -2^ between 125,000 and 115,000 years ago. From the
standpoint of insulation, the Eemian can hardly be taken as an analog for the next millennia, as is often assumed. The small amplitude
of future insolation variations is exceptional. One of the few past analogs (13) occurred at about 400,000 years before the present,
overlapping part of MIS-- 11. Then and now, very low eccentricity values coincided with the minima of the 400,000-year eccentricity
cycle. Eccentricity will reach almost zero within the next 25,000 years, damping the variations of precession considerably.
Simulations with a two-dimensional climate model (14), forced with insolation and CO^sub 2^ variations over the next 100,000 years,
provide an insight into the possible consequences of this rare phenomenon. Most CO^sub 2^ scenarios (15) led to an exceptionally
long interglacial from 5000 years before the present to 50,000 years from now (see the bottom panel of the figure), with the next
glacial maximum in 100,000 years. Only for CO^sub 2^ concentrations less than 220 ppmv was an early entrance into glaciation
simulated (15). Such a long interglacial appears to have occurred only once in the last 500,000 years, at MIS-11 (2, 3, 16). At this
time, astronomical insolation and some proxy climate indicators were similar to those of today. The COZ concentration was at an
interglacial level [slightly above 280 ppmv (8)]. Simulations with these values (16) also show a particularly long interglacial,
illustrating the importance of CO^sub 2^ concentrations during periods when the amplitude of insolation variation is too small to drive
the climate system. The present-day CO^sub 2^ concentration of 370 ppmv is already well above typical interglacial values of ~290
ppmv. Taking into account anthropogenic perturbations, we have studied further in which the CO2 concentration increases to up to
750 ppmv over the next 200 years, returning to natural levels by 1000 years from now (13, 15). The results suggest that, under very
small insolation variations, there is a threshold value of CO^sub 2^ above which the Greenland Ice Sheet disappears (see the bottom
panel of the figure). The climate system may take 50,000 years to assimilate the impacts of human activities during the early third
millennium. In this case, an "irreversible greenhouse effect" could become the most likely future climate. If the Greenland and west
Antarctic Ice Sheets disappear completely, then today's "Anthropocene" (17) may only be a transition between the Quaternary and the
next geological period. J. Murray Mitchell Jr. already predicted in 1972 that "The net impact of human activities on the climate of the
future decades and centuries is quite likely to be one of warming and therefore favorable to the perpetuation of the present
interglacial" [(1), p. 436].
Warming solves ice ages–human intervention is staving off a full blown ice age
Press Association 1-23-05
Humans may have unwittingly saved themselves from a looming ice age by interfering with the Earth's climate, according to a new
study. The findings from a team of American climate experts suggest that were it not for greenhouse gases produced by humans, the
world would be well on the way to a frozen Armageddon. Scientists have traditionally viewed the relative stability of the Earth's
climate since the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago as being due to natural causes. But there is evidence that changes in solar
radiation and greenhouse gas concentrations should have driven the Earth towards glacial conditions over the last few thousand years.
What stopped it has been the activity of humans, both ancient and modern, argue the scientists. Over the last 8,000 years carbon
dioxide levels in the atmosphere have gradually risen, when previous trends indicated that it should have dropped. Methane, another
greenhouse gas, had also increased instead of fallen. The unexpected trends could be explained by massive early deforestation in
Eurasia, rice farming in Asia, the introduction of livestock, and the burning of wood and plant material, all of which led to an
outpouring of greenhouse emissions. The United States researchers, led by William Ruddiman from the University of Virginia in
Charlottesville, used a climate model to test what would happen if these greenhouse gases were reduced to their "natural" level.
They wrote in the journal Quaternary Science Reviews: "In the absence of anthropogenic contributions, global climate is almost 2C
cooler than today and roughly one third of the way toward full glacial temperatures." At the peak of the last ice age, which began
70,000 years ago, 97% of Canada was covered by ice. The research showed that without the human contribution to global warming,
Baffin Island would today be in a condition of "incipient glaciation". "Portions of Labrador and Hudson Bay would also have moved
very close to such a state had greenhouse gas concentrations followed natural trends," said the scientists. The experiment had probably
underestimated the amount of ice that would exist today in north-east Canada without human interference, they said. The number of
potential influences on the model was deliberately limited in order to highlight the effect of greenhouse gases. It did not take into
account the effect of increased ice cover, which would have caused further cooling by reflecting back the sun's rays. Dynamic ocean
processes were also not accounted for. Anthropologist Dr Benny Peiser, from Liverpool John Moores University, said: "If the research
findings are correct, a radical change in the perception of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions will be required. "Instead of driving
us to the brink of environmental disaster, human intervention and technology progress will be seen as vital activities that have
unintentionally delayed the onset of a catastrophic ice age."
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
9/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE IMPACT – EXTINCTION
The impact of an ice age outweighs global warming – extinction
Jaworowski 2004 [Zbigniew, chairman @ Scientific Council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, 21 ST
CENTURY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, Winter/ttate]
It is difficult to predict the advent of a new Ice Age-the time when continental glaciers will start to cover Scandinavia, Central and
Northern Europe, Asia, Canada, and the United States, Chile and Argentina with a layer of ice hundreds and thousands of meters
thick; when mountain glaciers in the Himalayas, Andes and Alps, in Africa and Indonesia once again will descend into the valleys.
Some climatologists claim that this will happen in 50 to 150 years.
What fate awaits the Baltic Sea, the lakes, the forests, animals, cities, nations, and the whole infrastructure of modern civilization?
They will be swept away by the advancing ice and then covered by moraine hills. This disaster will be incomparably more calamitous
than all the doomsday prophecies of the proponents of the ~-made global warming hypothesis.
The current sunspot cycle is weaker than the preceding cycles, and the next two cycles will be even weaker. Bashkirtsev and Mishnich
expect that the minimum of the sec- ular cycle of solar activity will occur between 2021 and 2026, which will result in the minimum
global temperature of the surface air. The shift from warm to cool climate might have already started. The average annual air
temperature in Irkutsk, which correlates well with the average annual global temper- ature of the surface air, reached its maximum of
+2.3°C in 1997, and then began to drop to +1.2°C in 1998, to +0.7°C in 1999, and to +0.4°C in 2000. This prediction is in agreement
with major changes observed currently in biota of Pacific Ocean, associated with an oscillating climate cycle of about 50 years’
periodicity.
The approaching new Ice Age poses a real challenge for mankind, much greater than all the other challenges in history. Before it
comes-let's enjoy the warming, this benign gift from nature, and let's vigorously investigate the physics of clouds. F. Hoyle and C.
Wickramasinghe stated recently that "without some artificial means of giving positive feedback to the climate ... an eventual drift into
Ice Age conditions appears inevitable." These conditions "would render a large fraction of the world's major food growing areas
inoperable, and so would inevitably lead to the extinction of most of the present human population." According to Hoyle and
Wickramsinghe, "those who have engaged in uncritical scaremongering over an enhanced greenhouse effect raising the Earth's
temperature by a degree or two should be seen as both misguided and dangerous," for the problem of the present "is of a drift back
into an Ice Age, not away from an Ice Age."
Will mankind be able to protect the biosphere against the next returning Ice Age? It depends on how much time we still have. I do not
think that in the next 50 years we would acquire the knowledge and resources sufficient for governing climate on a global scale.
Surely we shall not stop climate cooling by increasing industrial CO2 emissions. Even with the doubling of CO2 atmospheric levels,
the increase in global surface air tem- perature would be trifling. However, it is unlikely that perma- nent doubling of the atmospheric
CO2 , even using all our car- bon resources, is attainable by human activities. Also, it does not seem possible that we will ever gain
influ- ence over the Sun’s activity. However, I think that in the next centuries we shall learn to control sea currents and clouds, and
this could be sufficient to govern the climate of our planet.
The following "thought experiment" illustrates how valuable our civilization, and the very existence of man's intellect, for the
terrestrial biosphere. Mikhail Budyko, the leading Russian climatologist (now deceased) predicted in 1982 a future drastic C02 deficit
in the atmosphere, and claimed that one of the next Ice Age periods could result in a freezing of the entire surface of the Earth,
including the oceans. The only niches of life, he said, would survive on the active volcano edges.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
10/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE IMPACT – DISEASES
Previous ice ages prove that diseases would run rampant.
Mandia in 7
(Scott A.; Professor of Physical Sciences @ SCCC.; The Little Ice Age in Europe; www2.sunysuffolk.edu)
The cooler climate during the LIA had a huge impact on the health of Europeans. As mentioned earlier, dearth and famine killed
millions and poor nutrition decreased the stature of the Vikings in Greenland and Iceland. Cool, wet summers led to outbreaks of an
illness called St. Anthony's Fire. Whole villages would suffer convulsions, hallucinations, gangrenous rotting of the extremities, and
even death. Grain, if stored in cool, damp conditions, may develop a fungus known as ergot blight and also may ferment just enough
to produce a drug similar to LSD. (In fact, some historians claim that the Salem, Massachusetts witch hysteria was the result of ergot
blight.) Malnutrition led to a weakened immunity to a variety of illnesses. In England, malnutrition aggravated an influenza epidemic
of 1557-8 in which whole families died. In fact, during most of the 1550's deaths outnumbered births (Lamb, 1995.) The Black Death
(Bubonic Plague) was hastened by malnutrition all over Europe.
Extinction
South China Morning Post, 1996 (1/4, l/n)
Despite the importance of the discovery of the "facilitating" cell, it is not what Dr Ben-Abraham wants to talk about. There is a much
more pressing medical crisis at hand - one he believes the world must be alerted to: the possibility of a virus deadlier than HIV. If this
makes Dr Ben-Abraham sound like a prophet of doom, then he makes no apology for it. AIDS, the Ebola outbreak which killed more
than 100 people in Africa last year, the flu epidemic that has now affected 200,000 in the former Soviet Union - they are all, according
to Dr Ben-Abraham, the "tip of the iceberg". Two decades of intensive study and research in the field of virology have convinced him
of one thing: in place of natural and man-made disasters or nuclear warfare, humanity could face extinction because of a single virus,
deadlier than HIV. "An airborne virus is a lively, complex and dangerous organism," he said. "It can come from a rare animal or
from anywhere and can mutate constantly. If there is no cure, it affects one person and then there is a chain reaction and it is
unstoppable. It is a tragedy waiting to happen."That may sound like a far-fetched plot for a Hollywood film, but Dr Ben -Abraham
said history has already proven his theory. Fifteen years ago, few could have predicted the impact of AIDS on the world . Ebola has
had sporadic outbreaks over the past 20 years and the only way the deadly virus - which turns internal organs into liquid - could be
contained was because it was killed before it had a chance to spread. Imagine, he says, if it was closer to home: an outbreak of that
scale in London, New York or Hong Kong. It could happen anytime in the next 20 years - theoretically, it could happen tomorrow.
The shock of the AIDS epidemic has prompted virus experts to admit "that something new is indeed happening and that the threat of a
deadly viral outbreak is imminent", said Joshua Lederberg of the Rockefeller University in New York, at a recent conference. He
added that the problem was "very serious and is getting worse". Dr Ben- Abraham said: "Nature isn't benign. The survival of the
human species is not a preordained evolutionary programme. Abundant sources of genetic variation exist for viruses to learn how to
mutate and evade the immune system." He cites the 1968 Hong Kong flu outbreak as an example of how viruses have outsmarted
human intelligence. And as new "mega-cities" are being developed in the Third World and rainforests are destroyed, disease-carrying
animals and insects are forced into areas of human habitation. "This raises the very real possibility that lethal, mysterious viruses
would, for the first time, infect humanity at a large scale and imperil the survival of the human race," he said.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
11/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE IMPACT – ECON
An ice age would destroy the economy. The market of crops would quickly become inflated and many economies would lose
tax revenues creating a domino-collapse effect.
Mandia in 7
(Scott A.; Professor of Physical Sciences @ SCCC.; The Little Ice Age in Europe; www2.sunysuffolk.edu)
In addition to increasing grain prices and lower wine production, there were many examples of economic impact by the dramatic
cooling of the climate. Due to famine, storms, and growth of glaciers ,many farmsteads were destroyed, which resulted in less tax
revenues collected due to decreased value of the properties (Lamb, 1995.) Cod fishing greatly decreased, especially for the Scottish
fisherman, as the cod moved farther south. The cod fishery at the Faeroe Islands began to fail around 1615 and failed altogether for
thirty years between 1675 and 1704 (Lamb, 1995.) In the Hohe Tauern mountains of the Austrian Alps, advancing glaciers closed the
gold mines of the Archbishop of Salzburg who was one of the wealthiest dukes in the empire. The succession of two or three bad
summers where the miners could not rely on work in the mines caused them to find employment elsewhere, which resulted in an
abrupt end to the mining operations (Bryson, 1977.)
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
12/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE IMPACT – SPECIES LOSS
An ice age will cause mass species extinctions whereas warming doesn’t
Budyko, et al 1998 [M.I. – researcher @ State Hydrological Insitute in USSR, “Natural Climatic Catastrophes”, GLOBAL
CLIMATIC CATASTROPHES]
The heating of the atmosphere as cause of animal extinction also seems highly improbable, because of the selective character of
the extinction. Vertebrates, including many groups that had no thermoregulation, disappeared, whereas warm-blooded animals
(mammals and birds) did not suffer. This indicates the, extinction of animals at the end of the Cretaceous to have been induced
by a short-term cooling.
B. Species loss leads to extinction.
Ehrlich ‘98 (Paul, Professor of Population Studies, Stanford University, and Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences |
“Rivets and Redundancy” – BioScience | Lexis)
But just because some functional groups consist of single species that warrant special attention, it does not follow that where there is
significant redundancy in a functional group we can afford to lose some of the species. Such a policy would lead to loss of
resilience. The essential message of both the redundancy and rivet-popper hypotheses is that we force species and populations
(Hughes et al. 1997) to extinction at our own peril. Humanity is utterly dependent on services delivered by ecosystems (Daily
1997). Considering the uncertainties and complexities in the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem services, policy
decisions should have a large “insurance” bias toward protection of biodiversity – and therefore especially toward functional groups in
which there is little or no redundancy.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
13/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE IMPACT – SUPER VOLCANOES
A. An ice age would cause super volcanoes
Brennan 2005 (Phil, Veteran Journalist for Newsmax, www.newsmax.com, Jan 25)
"The transition period between interglacial periods and glaciation is not a smooth one – history shows it to be violent beyond
imagination. And it may be just around the corner. If the unchallenged results of the work of Genevieve Woillard and others who
studied past ice ages are any indication of the pace of glaciation, once it starts, the transition period is a mere 20 years or so. And we
may be well into that 20-year period now. Woillard estimated that the period before that final 20 years – when the earth began gearing
up for an end to the interglacial period – could be as long as 150 years and as short as 75 years."
According to Woillard's studies and those of other paleological climate researchers, the transition between interglacial and glacial
periods is one of increasing violence – more volcanic eruptions, storms, earthquakes and other natural disasters.
Allow me to digress. In considering what lay behind the earthquake that triggered the killer tsunami, we should note that the size and
weight of the Antarctic ice pack has grown substantially in recent years. What's that got to do with the quake?
Just this, as I wrote in 1997: "As Peter Tomkins and Christopher Bird explained in their book, Secret of the Soil: "... ice and snow,
accumulating at the poles, presses down on the planet, causing it to bulge at the seams like a balloon. This triggers the prestressed earthquake faults into slipping. Hence earthquakes. It also causes volcanism – potentially more dangerous – by squeezing
magma and causing eruptions. The colder it gets and the more snow presses down on the Poles, the more magma is compressed and
volcanoes act up."
B. The impact is atrocious extinction and a nuclear winter
BBC News 2000 (February 3, Super Volcanoes, http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/1999/supervolcanoes.shtml, accessed 7/2/08)
Hidden deep beneath the Earth's surface lie one of the most destructive and yet least-understood natural phenomena in the world supervolcanoes. Only a handful exist in the world but when one erupts it will be unlike any volcano we have ever witnessed. The
explosion will be heard around the world. The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into the equivalent
of a nuclear winter. The last supervolcano to erupt was Toba 74,000 years ago in Sumatra. Ten thousand times bigger than Mt St
Helens, it created a global catastrophe dramatically affecting life on Earth. Scientists know that another one is due - they just don't
know when... or where. It is little known that lying underneath one of America's areas of outstanding natural beauty - Yellowstone
Park - is one of the largest supervolcanoes in the world. Scientists have revealed that it has been on a regular eruption cycle of
600,000 years. The last eruption was 640,000 years ago... so the next is overdue.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
14/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE – AT: SOLAR CYCLE THEORY FALSE
Recent research on seafloor sediment proves solar cycles theory correct
Pellerin, Thomson, and Goldstein 2003 [“Are ice age cycles of the Northern Hemisphere driven by processes in the Southern
Hemisphere?, BNET, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_gx5204/is_2003/ai_n19124300 / Chinikamwala]
Despite gaps in knowledge, many hypotheses exist about what causes an ice age to begin or end. Some focus on the Northern
Hemisphere as the connection between orbital variations and climate. In the 1930s, for example, the Serbian geophysicist Milutin
Milankovitch suggested that orbital variations in solar radiation at 60N drove the waxing and waning of ice sheets in North America
and Europe. In 1912, Milankovitch had described the small but regular changes in the shape of Earths orbit and the direction of its
axis, a process now called the Milankovitch cycle. A confluence of these factors maximum eccentricity (when Earths orbit is most
elliptical), extreme axial tilt (with the North Pole pointed most acutely away from the Sun), and precession, which delays and reduces
solar radiation at high northern latitudes could lead to a major ice age in the Northern Hemisphere.
A recent study of Antarctic seafloor sediment cores by an international team of scientists shows that changes in polar regions
particularly the advance and retreat of glaciers follow variations in Earths orbit, tilt, and precession as described in the Milankovitch
cycle. The samples showed that Antarctic glaciers advanced and retreated at regular intervals during a 400,000-year period, and the
glaciation and retreat cycle matched those predicted by Milankovitch, with increased glaciation at 100,000-and 40,000-year intervals.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
15/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
ICE AGE – AT: POLAR PRECIPITATION
Warming will decrease polar snow and ice – precipitation will not offset this effect.
Overland 07+ [James, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, John E. Walsh, International Arctic Research Center, Muyin Wang,
Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean, “Why Are Ice and Snow Changing?” from after April 6]
An important positive feedback is the ice and snow albedo feedback (see also Chapters 2, 4 and 5). Sea ice and snow have high
albedo. This means that they reflect most of the solar radiation. With warmer polar temperatures, the area of sea ice and snow
cover decreases, exposing new expanses of ocean and land surfaces that absorb an increased amount of solar radiation. This
increase of total absorbed solar radiation contributes to continued and accelerated warming. Many IPCC climate models suggest a
major loss in sea ice cover by the mid 21st century caused by albedo feedback from shrinking snow cover and increased open
water areas in summer15.
Changes in Antarctic sea-ice cover does not affect climate.
EPA 07 [Climate Change – Health and Environmental Effects, “Polar Regions,” December 17,
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/polarregions.html]
Antarctica has experienced significant retreat and collapse of ice shelves, the result of regional warming. The loss of these ice
shelves has few direct impacts on sea level and global climate. Because the ice shelves were floating, their melting does not
directly add to sea level rise. They usually are replaced by sea-ice cover, so overall albedo (reflectivity) changes very little (IPCC,
2007a).
Even if Antarctic ice sheets expand the West Antarctic ice sheet will not – polar precipitation is irrelevant.
EPA 07 [Climate Change – Health and Environmental Effects, “Polar Regions,” December 17,
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/polarregions.html]
As climate change continues, most of the land-based Antarctic ice sheet is actually likely to thicken if projected warming increases
snowfall. There is a small risk, however, that the West Antarctic ice sheet will retreat in coming centuries. This is because the
West Antarctic ice sheet is moored in an oceanic basin, where slippery mud covers the basin floor. This unique setting makes the
ice sheet potentially unstable (IPCC, 2007a).
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
16/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING GOOD – SYSTEMIC
Warming would prevent thousands of deaths each year by decreasing winter diseases
Langford and Bentham 95 ( Ian H. Langford - Health Policy and Practice Unit, School of Health and Social Work, University of East Anglia and Graham
Bentham - Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, 1995, “The potential
effects of climate change on winter mortality in England and Wales,” International Journal of Biometeorology, CM)
In Britain death rates from several important causes, particularly circulatory and respiratory diseases, rise markedly during the colder winter
months. This close association between temperature and mortality suggests that climate change as a result of global warming may lead
to a future reduction in excess winter deaths. This paper gives a brief introductory review of the literature on the links between cold conditions and health,
and statistical models are subsequently developed of the associations between temperature and monthly mortality rates for the years 1968 to 1988 for England and
Wales. Other factors, particularly the occurrence of influenza epidemics, are also taken into account. Highly significant negative
associations were found between temperature and death rates from all causes and from chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, ischaemic heart
disease and cerebrovascular disease. The statistical models developed from this analysis were used to compare death rates for current
conditions with those that might be expected to occur in a future warmer climate. The results indicate that the higher temperatures
predicted for 2050 might result in nearly 9000 fewer winter deaths each year with the largest contribution being from mortality from ischaemic heart
disease. However, these preliminary estimates might change when further research is able to make into account a number of additional factors affecting the relationship
between mortality and climate.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
17/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING DEFENSE – GENERIC
Apocalyptic warming scenarios are exaggerated
"Hans von Storch and Nico Stehr 01/24/2005 “How Global Warming Research is Creating a Climate of Fear”
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,342376,00.html
The pattern is always the same. The significance of individual events is turned into material suitable for media presentation and is then cleverly dramatized. When the outlook for
the future is discussed, the scenario that predicts the highest growth rates for greenhouse gas emissions -- which, of course,
comes with the most dramatic climatic consequences -- is always selected from among all possible scenarios. Those predicting
significantly smaller increases in greenhouse gas levels are not mentioned. Every prediction has to trump the last. Melting Antarctic ice is one of the current horror
scenarios du jour. Who benefits from this? The assumption is made that fear compels people to act, but we forget that it also produces a rather short-lived reaction. Climate change, on the
other hand, requires a long-term response. The impact on the public may be "better" in the short term, thereby also positively affecting reputations and research funding. But to ensure that
the entire system continues to function in the long term, each
new claim about the future of our climate and of the planet must be just a little more
dramatic than the last. It's difficult to attract the public's attention to the climate-related extinction of animal species following reports on apocalyptic heat waves. The only kind of
news that can trump these kinds of reports would be something on the order of a reversal of the Gulf Stream. All of this leads to a spiral of exaggeration. Each
individual step in this process may seem harmless, but on the whole, the knowledge imparted to the public about climate, climatic fluctuations, climate shift and climatic effects is
dramatically distorted.
And, adaptation sovles the impact – empirically proven
Michaels ‘7
(Patrick, Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies @ Cato and Prof. Environmental Sciences @ UVA, Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
“Global Warming: No Urgent Danger; No Quick Fix”, 8-21, http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8651)
We certainly adapted to 0.8 C temperature change quite well in the 20th century, as life expectancy doubled and some crop
yields quintupled. And who knows what new and miraculously efficient power sources will develop in the next hundred years. The
stories about the ocean rising 20 feet as massive amounts of ice slide off of Greenland by 2100 are also fiction. For the entire half
century from 1915 through 1965, Greenland was significantly warmer than it has been for the last decade. There was no disaster. More
important, there's a large body of evidence that for much of the period from 3,000 to 9,000 years ago, at least the Eurasian Arctic was
2.5 C to 7 C warmer than now in the summer, when ice melts. Greenland's ice didn't disappear then, either. Then there is the topic of
interest this time of year — hurricanes. Will hurricanes become stronger or more frequent because of warming? My own work
suggests that late in the 21st century there might be an increase in strong storms, but that it will be very hard to detect because of yearto-year variability. Right now, after accounting for increasing coastal population and property values, there is no increase in
damages caused by these killers. The biggest of them all was the Great Miami Hurricane of 1926. If it occurred today, it would easily
cause twice as much damage as 2005's vaunted Hurricane Katrina. So let's get real and give the politically incorrect answers to
global warming's inconvenient questions. Global warming is real, but it does not portend immediate disaster, and there's currently
no suite of technologies that can do much about it. The obvious solution is to forgo costs today on ineffective attempts to stop it, and
to save our money for investment in future technologies and inevitable adaptation.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
18/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING DEFENSE – CORAL REEFS
Turn: Global Warming increases coral reef growth
EurekAlert 4 (Global warming good news for coral reefs December 9 2004) <http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-12/uonsgwg120904.php>
Coral reefs are built from calcium carbonate when red algae cement together a framework of coral skeletons and sediments.
Seawater surface temperatures and the quantity of carbonate in seawater dictate their growth rate.
The Australian scientists have observed the calcification-temperature relationship at significant reef-building colonies around the
world in the Indo-Pacific and at massive Porites reef colonies in Australia, Hawaii, Thailand, the Persian Gulf and New Ireland.
The predicted increase in the rate of coral reef calcification is most likely due to an enhancement in coral metabolism and/or
increases in photosynthetic rates of red algae, according to the scientists. They used projections of ocean warming and CO2
concentration from a CSIRO climate model that accounts for atmosphere-ice and ocean carbon cycles.
"Our results show that increases in coral reef calcification associated with ocean warming outweigh decreases associated with
increased atmospheric CO2", says CSIRO's Dr Richard Matear. "While initially showing a decrease in calcification up to 1964,
ocean warming outweighs the CO2 effect and stimulates recovery of coral reef calcification. Our results represent an average
over the entire coral reef community and it will be important to undertake more specific regional analysis of models to better
understand future changes in regions such as Australia's Great Barrier Reef."
Multiple factors allow reefs to recover from stress
International Union for Conservation of Nature 9 (Jan 9, http://www.iucn.org/cccr/resilience_to_climate_change/) LL
Resilience - A promising paradigm Even though climate change and coral bleaching pose a serious threat to the future survival of coral
reefs, there is still hope that these ecosystems will be able to survive increased SSTs. Some coral reefs are able to withstand stresses to
a greater degree (are more resistant) while other coral reefs are able to recover from bleaching events more rapidly (are more resilient) depending on a number
of oceanographic, ecological and physiological factors. The principles of resistance and resilience are emerging as a promising paradigm to
aid the management of coral reefs in the face of climate change, and give hope in the face of adversity . The figure below illustrates the
stages in the coral bleaching process where it is possible for a coral or coral reef to survive the disturbance. It illustrates four main processes that can allow a coral
reef to survive: protection, resistance, tolerance and resilience. Protection Oceanographic and other environmental factors that create pockets of
reduced or non-stressful conditions where ecosystems are protected from disturbances (Salm et al, 2001). A coral reef can be protected against
increased SSTs or light levels and therefore against bleaching by local upwelling, fast water flow, shading and screening. Resistance The ability of an
organism or ecosystem to withstand disturbance without undergoing a phase shift or losing neither structure nor function (Odum,
1989). For example a coral reef’s ability to withstand bleaching and mortality. Coral morphology, different zooxanthellae clades and coral acclimatisation can all
influence a coral reef's resistance to bleaching. Tolerance The ability of an organism to absorb a disturbance and not suffer mortality ( Obura,
2006). For example, a coral’s ability to bleach, and then recover its zooxanthellae to become healthy again. Resilience The ability of a system
to absorb or recover from disturbance and change, while maintaining its functions and services (Adapted from Carpenter et al, 2001). For example a coral reef’s
ability to recover from a bleaching event. Factors that can improve a coral reef's resilience to a mass bleaching event include good
species and functional diversity, good connectivity to larval sources, appropriate substrates for larval settlement and protection
from other anthropogenic impacts.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
19/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING DEFENSE – ICE AGE (GULF STREAM)
1. The Gulf Stream doesn’t matter—The Rocky Mountains keep Europe warm
Avery 2004 (Dennis, Director of the Center for Global Food Issues, May 10, Will Global Warming Bring on the New Ice Age,
http://www.globalwarming.org/node/630, 7/1/08)
The other problem for Mr. Quaid's credibility is that the Gulf Stream isn't what keeps Britain warm. It's the Rocky Mountains.
The textbooks say the Gulf Stream is what keeps Britain from being sub-Arctic, but they're wrong. They're based on nothing more
substantial than a statement by a U.S. Navy lieutenant, Matthew Maury in1856.
"One of the benign offices of the Gulf Stream is to convey heat from the Gulf of Mexico, where otherwise it would become excessive,
and to disperse it in regions beyond the Atlantic for the amelioration of the climates of the British Isles and of all Western Europe,"
wrote Maury.
He wasn't wrong. He just wasn't very right.
The Gulf Stream does carry heat from the tropics to the shores of Britain-in fact, 27,000 times as much heat as UK's powerplants
generate. The warm current helps keep London 25 to 35 degrees F warmer than Newfoundland, which is at the same latitude.
However, new climate research shows that only about 10 percent of Britain's winter warming comes from the Gulf Stream. Half of the
rest comes from the Atlantic Ocean itself, which holds heat longer than the land.
The rest of the warming for Britain is delivered by west-to-east winds from the America's Rocky Mountains.
Dr. Richard Seager, of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, says, "Belief in the benign role of the Gulf Stream
is so widespread that it has become folklore." But Seager and his research team used weather data from the past 50 years-and a
powerful computer model- to describe how heat is shifted around the globe. They found the key to Britain's climate was the warm
wind from southern North America. The American wind is forced into a giant "meander" as it flows southeast around the Rocky
Mountains.
2. Gulf Stream failure couldn’t be caused by warming
Michaels 2004 (patrick, senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute, Alameda Times Star, 5-23)
IS a Gulf Stream "failure" that would be sufficient to produce an ice age even possible? Ask MIT's Carl Wunsch, the world's authority
on oceanic currents. He's very upset at these silly scenarios and believes they can harm efforts to reduce industrial emissions by
subjecting the entire global warming issue to ridicule. [After all, Gore is the pitchman.] Wunsch recently wrote in a letter to Nature
magazine that the only way to trigger a Gulf Stream-caused ice age "is either to turn off the wind system, or to stop the earth's rotation,
or both."
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
20/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING DEFENSE – ICE AGE (NORTH ATLANTIC CURRENT)
1. No shutdown – new research shows current is more stable than previously thought – Even the IPPC votes neg
New York Times 2007 [May 15, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/science/earth/15cold.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1]
All that has now been removed from the forecast. Not only is northern Europe warming, but every major climate model produced by
scientists worldwide in recent years has also shown that the warming will almost certainly continue. “The concern had previously been
that we were close to a threshold where the Atlantic circulation system would stop,” said Susan Solomon, a senior scientist at the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “We now believe we are much farther from that threshold, thanks to improved
modeling and ocean measurements. The Gulf Stream and the North Atlantic Current are more stable than previously thought.”
After consulting 23 climate models, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in February it was “very
unlikely” that the crucial flow of warm water to Europe would stall in this century. The panel did say that the gradual melting of the
Greenland ice sheet along with increased precipitation in the far north were likely to weaken the North Atlantic Current by 25 percent
through 2100. But the panel added that any cooling effect in Europe would be overwhelmed by a general warming of the atmosphere,
a warming that the panel said was under way as a result of rising concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases.
“The bottom line is that the atmosphere is warming up so much that a slowdown of the North Atlantic Current will never be able to
cool Europe,” said Helge Drange, a professor at the Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center in Bergen, Norway.
2. Global warming won’t lead to ice age – incorrect models
Weaver and Hillaire- Marcel 2004 [Andrew – prof @ School of Earth and Ocean Sciences @ University of Victoria and C. – researcher @ GEOTOP @
Univ. de Quebec a Montreal, “Global warming and the next ice age”, SCIENCE, April 16, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/304/5669/400 /]
It is certainly true that if the AMO were to become inactive, substantial short-term cooling would result in western Europe, especially
during the winter. However, it is important to emphasize that not a single coupled model assessed by the 2001 IPCC Working Group I
on Climate Change Science (4) predicted a collapse in the AMO during the 21st century. Even in those models where the AMO was
found to weaken during the 21st century, there would still be warming over Europe due to the radiative forcing associated with
increased levels of greenhouse gases. Models that eventually lead to a collapse of the AMO under global warming conditions typically
fall into two categories: (i) flux-adjusted coupled general circulation models, and (ii) intermediate-complexity models with zonally
averaged ocean components. Both suites of models are known to be more sensitive to freshwater perturbations. In the first class of
models, a small perturbation away from the present climate leads to large systematic errors in the salinity fields (as large flux
adjustments are applied) that then build up to cause dramatic AMO transitions. In the second class of models, the convection and
sinking of water masses are coupled (there is no horizontal structure). In contrast, newer non-flux-adjusted models find a more stable
AMO under future conditions of climate change (11, 13, 14). Even the recent observations of freshening in the North Atlantic (15) (a
reduction of salinity due to the addition of freshwater) appear to be consistent with the projections of perhaps the most sophisticated
non-flux-adjusted model (11). Ironically, this model suggests that such freshening is associated with an increased AMO (16). This
same model proposes that it is only Labrador Sea Water formation that is susceptible to collapse in response to global warming.
In light of the paleoclimate record and our understanding of the contemporary climate system, it is safe to say that global warming will
not lead to the onset of a new ice age. These same records suggest that it is highly unlikely that global warming will lead to a
widespread collapse of the AMO--despite the appealing possibility raised in two recent studies (18, 19)--although it is possible that
deep convection in the Labrador Sea will cease. Such an event would have much more minor consequences on the climate
downstream over Europe.
3. Warming cannot cause ice ages—the North Atlantic Current is not a key regulator
Marsh 2008 [George, retired physicist @ Argonne National Laboratory and former consultant to the Dept of Defense, “The Coming
of a New Ice Age”, http://www.winningreen.com/site/epage/59549_621.htm /
There has been much speculation in both the scientific and popular literature that increased warming as a consequence of
anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions could lead to an increased flow of fresh water into the north Atlantic that would shut down
the thermohaline circulation, known alternately as the meridional overturning circulation or the Atlantic heat conveyor [21]. This in
turn it is argued, could initiate a new ice age in Europe. There are two major misconceptions behind such speculation: First, the Gulf
Stream is not responsible for the transport of most of the heat that gives Europe its mild climate [22]; and while the shut down of the
thermohaline circulation does appear to play an important role in the dramatic drop in temperature due to Heinrich and DansgaardOeschger events [23], such shutdowns can only occur during an ice age. Indeed, Broecker [24], who first linked the thermohaline
circulation to the ice ages, now discounts the fear that a shutdown of the thermohaline circulation could trigger an ice age. He has
pointed out that for that scenario to work feedback amplification from extensive sea ice is required [25]. The possibility that global
warming could trigger an ice age through shutdown of the thermohaline circulation may therefore be discounted.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
21/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING DEFENSE – OCEANS
New data proves- oceans cooling.
Young 2k8 (Gregory, Dr. Gregory Young is a neuroscientist and physicist, a doctoral graduate of the University of Oxford, Oxford,
England. He is currently involved with a privately funded think-tank engaged in experimental biophysical research., “Global
Warming? Bring it On!”, http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/global_warming_bring_it_on.html)
(3) As recently presented in American Thinker, Lord Monckton competently summarizes for us that many of the highly publicized
AGW "facts" are simple documented anomalies of natural climate cycling -- designedly misrepresented for the cause of AGW.
To wit: The Oceans are not catastrophically rising nor are they warming. In fact, the oceans have been cooling since 2003. The
Snows of Kilimanjaro are not melting but ablating because of friction due to a cooling atmosphere and natural cooling trends. The
world's 160,000 glaciers are not suddenly receding, but appear to be re-advancing, including those ice shelves in Antarctic and the
polar ice sheets, all of which cycle regularly in ice mass. Lord Monckton, a science-journalist, provides even more evidence here.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!
Impact File – Warming Good
22/22
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
WARMING DEFENSE – WAR
No link between warming and war – if anything an ice age would see more violence.
Tol & Wagner ’08 [Richard & Sebastian, Economic & social Research Institute for Coastal Research, Jan 15, “Climate Change and
Violent Conflict in Europe over the Last Millennium,” http://www.fnu.zmaw.de/fileadmin/fnu-files/publication/workingpapers/climatewarwp.pdf]
In this paper, we study the relationship between climate change and violent conflict over the past millennium in Europe. Our results do
not show a clear-cut picture: We present some evidence that abnormally cold periods were abnormally violent, as do Zhang et al.
(2006). However, we also show that this evidence is not particularly robust. If one has strong priors that climate change causes
conflict, our results provide confirmation. However, if one has strong priors that there is no link, our results do not overthrow such
doubt. If anything, cold implies violence, and this effect is much weaker in the modern world than it was in mediaeval times. This
implies that future global warming is not likely to lead to (civil) war between (within) European countries. Should anyone ever
seriously have believed that, this paper does put that idea to rest.
Many examples disprove the warming results in conflict.
Salehyan ’07 [Idean, Assistant Professor of Political Science at UNT, “The New Myth About Climate Change: Corrupt, tyrannical
governments-not changes in the Earth’s climate-will be to blame for the coming resource wars,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3922]
First, aside from a few anecdotes, there is little systematic empirical evidence that resource scarcity and changing environmental
conditions lead to conflict. In fact, several studies have shown that an abundance of natural resources is more likely to contribute to
conflict. Moreover, even as the planet has warmed, the number of civil wars and insurgencies has decreased dramatically. Data
collected by researchers at Uppsala University and the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo shows a steep decline in the
number of armed conflicts around the world. Between 1989 and 2002, some 100 armed conflicts came to an end, including the
wars in Mozambique, Nicaragua, and Cambodia. If global warming causes conflict, we should not be witnessing this downward
trend. Furthermore, if famine and drought led to the crisis in Darfur, why have scores of environmental catastrophes failed to set off
armed conflict elsewhere? For instance, the U.N. World Food Programme warns that 5 million people in Malawi have been
experiencing chronic food shortages for several years. But famine-wracked Malawi has yet to experience a major civil war. Similarly,
the Asian tsunami in 2004 killed hundreds of thousands of people, generated millions of environmental refugees, and led to severe
shortages of shelter, food, clean water, and electricity. Yet the tsunami, one of the most extreme catastrophes in recent history, did not
lead to an outbreak of resource wars. Clearly then, there is much more to armed conflict than resource scarcity and natural disasters.
All I Do Is WIN WIN WIN No Matter What!