15 FALL 2011

Global Warming
The Hottest Debate of the Decade
kriSten Flint 14
WORLD
G
lobal warming has been a point
of contention in our society for
years, and the extreme views
from both sides of the argument have
transformed the subject of global warm-
ing from a factual theory into a mythical
idea. At one extreme, those who con-
sider themselves green bemoan the
tragedy that man is causing our planets
climate to heat up while the other side
of the debate refuses to believe any part
of the global warming theory. Behind
both opinions, there is often confusion,
misunderstanding, and a general lack
of knowledge. The theory that global
warming has anthropogenic causes has
existed for over a century, and scien-
tists have collected evidence on global
warming for over ffty years. In spite
of the evidence, the public generally
lives in the dark, constantly wonder-
ing if global warming is fact or fction.
Global warming is the increase in
the Earths temperature caused by in-
creased emission of greenhouse gases
into the atmosphere (1). The greenhouse
gases, including CO
2
, form a blanket
in the Earths atmosphere that traps
heat and causes global temperatures
to increase (1). This theory of global
warming was frst offered by a Swed-
ish chemist named Svante Arrhenius
in 1896 (2). Arrhenius estimated that
doubling the level of carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere would raise the mean
global temperature by several degrees
(2). Even then, his audience was skep-
tical as many other factors could also
affect global temperature. Since Arrhe-
nius paper, the global warming discus-
sion has grown convoluted as both sci-
entists and the media have addressed
the subject. Scientists track climate
change and publish their evidence, but
then the media hypes it up in its articles
to the public. To add to the confusion,
the public tends to avoid thinking much
about the topic unless extreme weather
occurs unexpectedly. However, despite
overwhelming opinions, there are facts
to support both sides of the debate.
Media vs. Science
The greatest source of confusion
about global warming comes from the
media. During periods of natural disas-
terearthquakes, foods, hurricanes
the media reports more heavily about
the existence of global warming. At
other times, and in certain regions, the
media stops discussing global warming
completely. When global warming frst
came to the forefront of science, poli-
tics, and our culture, scientists were
the main sources of information for the
media (3). More recently, the sources
have changed to interest groups and
politicians rather than those directly re-
searching the topic (3). For example, in
2006, Al Gore created the well-known
documentary An Inconvenient Truth
to relay certain facts and predictions
about global warming. His documenta-
ry made over $49 million, reaching mil-
lions of people and starting more con-
versations about global warming (4). Its
success outweighs the success of most
Image courtesy of Robert Simmon/NASA.
During the decade between 2000 and 2009, average surface temperatures increased by as much as two degrees Celsius in certain locations over
benchmarks recorded between 1951 and 1980.
DARTMOUTH UNDERGRADUATE JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 16
papers published in scientifc maga-
zines because it reached such a vast au-
dience (4). The politician replaced the
scientists as the informer of the public.
This mixing of sources from sci-
entists and politicians has caused the
media to convey a greater sense of un-
certainty about global warming. PhD
student Jessica Durfee and associate
professor Julia Corbett from the Uni-
versity of Utah department of commu-
nication studied the publics response to
articles about global warming that used
conficting sources. Durfee and Corbett
made up four versions of a news story
based on a scientifc article that sug-
gested some uncertainty about global
warming. Several people read each ver-
sion, which differed in the amount of
controversy and context they included,
and then took a survey about their cer-
tainty of global warming. Durfee and
Corbett found that scientifc context
led to the greatest certainty about glob-
al warming, and controversy caused
greater uncertainty about the issue.
Furthermore, added controversy be-
tween the differing scientifc and politi-
cal opinions diminished the perceived
importance of global warming. (3)
The Internet provides anoth-
er source of confusion about global
warming. Scientifc articles, news ar-
ticles, and blog entries found on the
Internet all provide accounts of global
warming but have dramatically differ-
ent levels of credibility. However, the
average Internet user does not take the
credibility of his or her sources into ac-
count. To further complicate matters,
the Internet has so many articles on the
subject that the information a reader
receives depends on factors such as the
Web design of the article and the sites
to which the article is linked rather
than the credibility and truth of the
article. Thus, the Internet does not al-
ways provide clear, high-quality facts
and evidence for global warming. (1)

Scientific Evidence
The global warming contro-
versy also exists within the scien-
tifc community. Scientists agree that
the theory makes sense: increased
concentrations of greenhouse gases
within the atmosphere should cause
temperatures to rise (1). However,
they disagree about whether and
how global warming has occurred.
Scientists have a wide array of evi-
dence to support the theory that man
has caused global warming. Firstly,
evidence from meteorological stations
that record the global mean tempera-
ture supports the claim that global
temperature has steadily risen since
1980. Scientists have also studied ice
cores to measure the amount of carbon
dioxide present in the atmosphere dur-
ing a given year. By plotting the tem-
perature information with the mea-
surements of carbon dioxide, scientists
have found that the two have a positive
correlation. Both temperature and the
amount of carbon dioxide in the atmo-
sphere have steadily increased since
1980, causing many scientists to agree
that greater carbon dioxide emissions
cause the temperature to increase. (5)
In 2007, Nature published a re-
cap of changes that had occurred since
2005. Within those two years, the rate
of polar ice melting increased, Antarc-
tica weather balloons steadily warmed,
and the sea level rose (6). Earth scien-
tists also point to evidence from the
natural climate change cycles of the
Earth. The Earth has gone through
many natural phases of climate change.
Until approximately 2.75 million years
ago, the climate changed every 23,000
years or so (7). After that, the intervals
between the climate changes increased
to todays interval of 100,000 years.
Again, the science world has reached
a consensus that with this evidence,
the Earth does appear to be warming.
However, the skeptics still assert that
man has not acted as the sole or pri-
mary factor causing global warming.
Skeptical scientists point to evi-
dence to back their claim that man is
not the cause of global warming. These
skeptics believe that global warming
is a purely natural process. Skeptics
discount much of the evidence that
pro-global warming scientists have
put forth. They claim that some re-
search units that provide the global
mean temperature series are hiding
data and falsifying scientifc evidence
on global warming. More substan-
tively, the skeptics also point out that
the temperature data does not cover
much of the worlds geography, and
the temperature data is negatively af-
fected by urban expansion in what
is known as the heat island effect.
Skeptics also accuse climatologists who
predict future global warming of leav-
ing out the impact of natural process-
es, which are not easy to predict. (8)
Another factor that affects both
groups opinions is the groups different
sources of funding. The skeptics tend to
be backed by industries that work with
fossil fuels. Fossil fuel industries do not
care so much about the debate as creat-
ing confusion amongst the public about
the topic of global warming. Thus,
while scientists generally agree that
the Earth is warming, they disagree
about the cause of global warming.
More research will be needed to assign
a defnite cause to global warming. (1)

Global Warming as a
Boon and a Bane
With all the confusion surround-
ing the global warming debate, much
of the public only takes from the me-
dia that global warming will harm our
world. However, global warming has
potential benefts as well as drawbacks.
First of all, as the temperature
increases, the Earth will have a longer
growing season in many areas. In gen-
eral, there will be less freezing weather,
and the increased temperatures and
carbon dioxide levels will allow more
plant growth. With more plant growth
and a longer growing season, there will
be more food for people and livestock.
The warmer weather will also positively
affect transportation. Airplanes, trains,
buses, and cars will stop having cold
weather-related delays for ice and snow.
Thus, contrary to popular belief, global
warming can have some benefts. (9)
Of course, global warming also
has many negative effects on the Earth.
Global warming is and will continue to
have dramatic effects on aquatic life and
biodiversity. To compound the natural
detrimental effects to ecosystems, hu-
mans may further disturb the ecosys-
tems. For example, by trying to combat
the effects of rising sea levels, man may
work to maintain the coastline. In our
attempts to protect the coastline habitat,
other species may disappear. Increased
temperatures will also negatively affect
the food supply in many places, nulli-
fying the benefts of a longer growing
season. The temperature increases will
bring hotter temperatures in the sum-
17 FALL 2011
mer, which may cause plants to die. It
could also cause weather patterns, such
as more intense foods and storms. (9)
In the future, global warming
could prove to be a boon and a bane to
the world, but it is impossible to esti-
mate just how much of either it could be.
Water Vapor as a
Greenhouse Gas
Carbon dioxide is not the only
greenhouse gas contributing to global
warming; at high altitudes, water va-
por also acts as a greenhouse gas, trap-
ping heat on the Earths surface (10).
Water vapor acts as positive feedback
to the greenhouse gas phenomenon
because it prevents heat from leaving
the Earths atmosphere, just like car-
bon dioxide. Carbon dioxide causes the
greenhouse effect, but water vapor is a
more serious problem because as the
temperature rises from the greenhouse
effect, more water is able to stay in its
gaseous form higher in the atmosphere
(10). Scientists have used computer
models to fnd that the water vapor in-
tensifes the warming effects of carbon
dioxide by at least a factor of two (11).
On the other hand, water vapor also
contributes the global cooling process
as it condenses and falls as rain when
too much of it exists lower in the at-
mosphere. It also blocks some of the
suns heat from reaching the Earth (11).
Overall, water vapor currently has a net
effect of keeping the Earth cooler even
though it acts as a greenhouse gas (11).
Conclusion
When trying to determine if global
warming is fact or fction, we must take
into account evidence from all sides.
Plenty of evidence exists within the
science community, including skepti-
cal opinions against global warming.
While the evidence points to the ex-
istence of global warming, the cause
is still widely disputed. Additionally,
the media reports on other sources of
evidence for global warming from dif-
ferent political groups. Ultimately, the
world still lacks a consensus on the
topic of global warming: its causes,
its presence, and its effects. However,
armed with the proper knowledge, we
can each decide for ourselves where we
stand in the global warming debate.
References:
1. P. Moriarty, D. Kennedy. Cybernet. Syst. 35,
723-725 (2004).
2. S. Weart, B. Atom. Sci. 67, 41-50 (2011).
3. J. Durfee, J. Corbett. Nieman Reports 59,
88-89 (2005).
4. S. Quiring, GeoJournal 70, 1-3 (2007).
5. G. A. Florides, P. Christodoulides. Environ.
Int. 35, 390-401 (2009).
6. P. Pockley, Australasian Science 28, 28-31
(2007).
7. J. Rose, P. Geologist. Assoc. 121, 334-341
(2010).
8. S. Wang, Chinese Sci. Bull. 55, 1961-1962
(2010).
9. T. Moore, EMBO Reports 9, S41-S45 (2008).
10. S. Sherwood, Australasian Science 30,
25-27 (2009).
11. R. Spencer, Social Science and Public
Policy 44, 45-50 (2007).