Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 1 of 7
Scientists have recently issued the following predictions about the dire consequences of
global warming: disease, famine, war, and death. One report argues that “within 100 years,
temperatures could rise by 6C worldwide. Much of the earth’s surface could become
uninhabitable, and most species could be wiped out” (“A Modest Proposal” 2). In another
report, “the World Health Organization blames climate change for at least 160,000 deaths last
year” (“A Modest Proposal” 2). Indeed, a bleak picture exists unless global warming is brought
under control. However, before we can solve the problem of global warming, we need to agree
on its causes. This paper attempts to move us toward a consensus about the cause and effects of
global warming. More specifically, I will defend the following proposition of fact: Over the last
century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming. In order to defend this
claim, I first consider the significance of global warming to the United States, elaborate on the
meaning of global warming as currently understood, and then focus attention on the specific
relationship between human behavior and the phenomenon of global warming.
As Americans, we should be concerned about global warming. In many ways, our
collective position is out of line with the rest of the world. “America is the only country in the
world where the political debate has still not caught up this fact. The current administration
stands alone in its refusal to face up to the threat” (Lynas B1). Even Tony Blair, Bush’s closest
ally among current world leaders, recently “urged the international community to consider global
warming a dire threat and agree on a plan of action to curb the ‘alarming’ growth of greenhouse
gases. The threat, he said in a speech, poses a ‘challenge so far-reaching in its impact and
irreversible in its destructive power that it alters radically human existence” (Alvarez A13).
Americans need to consider why our opinions are so radically different from the rest of the
world.
Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 2 of 7
There are three key terms that need to be addressed in this proposition: Human activity,
acceleration, and global warming. When I refer to “human activity,” I mean actions taken by
human beings as opposed to natural environmental processes. For example, it might be the case
that natural processes, such as fluctuations in the respiration levels of plants, contribute to the
greenhouse effect. However, I am not concerned with identifying or isolating those causes.
Instead, I want to keep this term limited to the use of fossil fuels or the modification of the
environment such as deforestation. Another important term is accelerated. For this definition, I
turn to the Oxford English Dictionary. It defines accelerate as, among other things, “to hasten
the occurrence of (an event), to bring it nearer, by quickening intervening processes, or by
shortening the interval.” If I can prove that human activities “hasten the occurrence” of global
warming, then I have proven a relationship between the two events. Finally, I need to define
global warming. For this definition I used the American Heritage Dictionary. It defined global
warming as “an increase in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere, especially a
sustained increase sufficient to cause climatic change.” Now I need to prove the relationship
between human activity and global warming.
Even the conservative-minded Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) admits that
humans have put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and that the global climate has
warmed over the last century. As to the increased levels of greenhouse gases (water vapor,
carbon dioxide, methane, and other gases), the EPA states that “since the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have increased nearly 30%,
methane concentrations have more than doubled, and nitrous oxide concentrations have risen by
about 15%” (n.p.). This could become disastrous for “by 2100, in the absence of emission
control policies, carbon dioxide concentrations are projected to 30-150% higher than today’s
Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 3 of 7
levels” (n.p.). The EPA also notes that “the 20th century’s 10 warmest years all occurred in the
last 15 years of the century. Of these, 1998 was the warmest year on record” (n.p.). The EPA is
unwilling, however, to concede the argument that there is direct causal link between these two
facts. As they argue, “the heat-trapping property of these gases is undisputed although
uncertainties exist about exactly how the earth’s climate responds to them” (n.p.). Thus far, the
U.S. government has issued a non-denial denial by questioning only the extent of the connection
between human activity and global warming. Other departments of the U.S. federal government
have similarly conceded the realities of global warming. The Pentagon “issued a report earlier
this year admitting that imminent and catastrophic climate change is now ‘a plausible scenario’
and a greater threat to U.S. national security than terrorism” (Hari 33).
Dr. Lara Hansen, a senior scientist with the Climate Change program of the World
Wildlife Fund, recently argued in a Senate hearing that “carbon dioxide and other greenhouse
gases, generated by the anthropogenic burning of fossil fuels, have resulted in global warming”
(n.p.). Hansen based her arguments on signs of global warming, namely the ways in which nonhuman animals have been impacted by global warming. For example, the American pika is a
mammal that “lives at higher elevations due to factors including heat intolerance” and “historic
populations of pika have disappeared” because of climate change (n.p.). Hansen’s strongest
evidence for her claims comes from the bleaching of coral reefs. Increased water temperatures
disrupt aquatic ecosystems and the coral reefs lose vital nutrients necessary for their health. The
best data is quite alarming on this point. Hansen states that “from 1876-1979, only three
bleaching events were recorded, whereas 60 are on record from 1980-1993” (n.p.). From this
data, Hansen concludes that “the increase in bleaching occurrence and scale indicates that
Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 4 of 7
anthropogenic alterations of the environment are responsible, notably global climate change
related increases in annual sea surface temperature and occurrence of ENSO events” (n.p.).
There is also anecdotal evidence from other parts of the globe. Blue mussels were found
“growing on the seabed just 800 miles from the North Pole in a likely sign of global warming”
(“The Arctic” A1). England’s weather patterns have also been impacted by global warming. As
a reporter for the London-based newspaper The Independent put it: “In the summer of 2003, out
recorded temperatures broke through the 100F level for the first time—and 2,000 people died as
a result. The canary in the environmental mineshaft just stopped singing” (Hari 33). And the
recent string of Atlantic hurricanes and tropical storms can be seen as evidence of global
warming. Some have tried to dismiss the linkages between global warming and these storms
(Jha 2). One commentator even argued that the storms are not getting worse but instead “the
perception has changed. More people and global television mean that freak events are less likely
to escape detection, and do more damage because of the higher value of what in their path”
(Collins 20). However, these people are not taking into account the increased intensity of these
storms—even if there the same number of storms remains the same, present and future storms
are more powerful and intense as a result of global warming (Lynas B1).
Dr. James O’Brien, also known as “Dr. El Nino” for his work in oceanic sciences, claims
that current global climate models provide inaccurate information because the models rely on
“inadequate physics—particularly the ocean component” (37). The major problem with the
models, according to O’Brien, is that they don’t include reliable measurements of ocean currents
and temperatures. O’Brien goes on to further claim that “the current models are not capable in
calculating the climate system well enough for policymakers to believe in any projection” (37).
While O’Brien is an expert in his field (he is the Florida’s State Climatologist and a scientist for
Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 5 of 7
40 years), it should be noted that these comments were given at a hearing in which he wanted to
make the case that more federal money should be given for a new form of climate modeling.
The preceding comment does not disqualify O’Brien’s observations but it does mean that his
comments should be read within a certain context and for a certain effect.
In response to these skeptics, I have two main lines of argument. First, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued a report that refutes all of this.
The IPCC is a body established by the United Nations to review all of the scientific data about
climate change. In their latest report, they conclude that the preponderance of evidence shows
that “the increase in temperature in the 20th century is likely to have been the largest of any
century during the past 1,000 years. It is also likely that, in the Northern Hemisphere, the 1990s
was the warmest decade and the warmest year” (“Summary for Policymakers” 2). It is important
to note that when they use the word “likely” this means that there is a 66-90% chance that the
fact is true which means that it can be trusted. These statistics, of course, do not establish a
causal relationship but the relationship can be found later in the same report. The IPCC states
that “the present CO2 concentration has not been exceeded during the past 420,000 years and
likely not during the past 20 million years. The current rate of increase is unprecedented during
at least the past 20,000 years” (“Summary for Policymakers” 7). The IPCC further argues that
these levels of CO2 have been directly linked to human activity and “the balance of evidence
suggests a discernable human influence on global warming” (10).
The other main line of argument that I have in support of my proposition is that current
satellite data further confirms these findings. Recent research, funded by the U.S. federal
government, “has revealed that temperatures in a critical part of the atmosphere are rising much
faster than previously thought, strengthening the scientific consensus that the world is warming
Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 6 of 7
at an unnatural rate. The discovery resolves one of the most contentious anomalies in climate
science, which has often been invoked by the Bush Administration to question whether manmade global warming is happening” (Henderson 4). As the article goes on, it further explains
that this evidence provides the necessary link to human activity: “Skeptics have often argued
that if temperatures are rising at all, this is down to natural variation in the climate as the world
emerges from a ‘little Ice Age.’ The tropospheric trend, however, is precisely what scientists
would expect to see if man-made emissions of greenhouse gases were causing it to heat up” (4).
In this paper, I have defined and defended my proposition of fact. I have established
clear evidence that directly implicates human activity in the rise in global temperatures. I have
entertained the ideas of my opponents and I have answered their criticisms. It is important that
we accept my proposition of fact as the truth because “we have a window of opportunity not to
prevent further and more catastrophic damage if elected officials act quickly” (Hansen n.p.).
Proposition of Fact Sample Paper—“Over the last century, human activity has accelerated the rate of global warming.” Page 7 of 7
Works Cited
Alvarez, Lizette. “Blair Warns of Climate Threat.” New York Times 15 September 2004: A13.
Collins, Neil. “Afraid of Global Warming? Chill Out.” The Daily Telegraph 20 September
2004: 20.
Environmental Protection Agency. Global Warming—Climate. 20 September 2004
<http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/climate.html>.
Hansen, Lara. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Hearings on
Climate Change. 108th Cong. 2nd sess. Washington: GPO, 2004.
Hari, Johann. “The Global Warming Crisis.” The Independent 15 September 2004: 33.
Henderson, Mark. “Scientists Claim Final Proof of Global Warming.” The Times 6 May 2004:
4.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers: A Report of Working
Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available at
<http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/spm22-01.pdf >
Jha, Alok. “The Science Behind the News.” The Guardian 16 September 2004: 2.
Lynas, Mark. “Warning in the Winds.” Washington Post 19 September 2004: B1.
“A Modest Proposal to Save the Planet.” The Independent 27 May 2004: 2+.
“Mussels Found Near Pole in Global Warming Sign.” New York Times 18 September 2004: A5.
O’Brien, James. Cong. Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Hearings on the U.S.
Climate Change Assessment. 107th Cong, 2nd sess. Washington: GPO, 2002: 34-41.