TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Other side of climate change debate?

I don't want to start an argument over which side is right. I am trying to educate myself with views from both sides of the issue before I form my opinion. I haven't formed one yet on man made climate change, but I can't find any TED talks that are from the camp that say man made CO2 is not the cause of climate change... Does anyone know of one I could watch?
Kind Regards,


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Feb 27 2013: Bjorn Lomborg has presented an alternative to the two sides of the debate in a rational and enlightening way. Worth the time to watch and scrutinize. Also worth a look at his documentary "Cool It".


    What we don't "know" in the context of our global climate is far greater than what we do know…for instance, we don't know to what extent CO2 is a factor in atmospheric warming. Furthermore the current "changes" we perceive are in terms of a very short time frame relative to geological time. Ice core data also seems to indicate a lag in the relationship between a rise in CO2 levels and actual temperature rise. This alone is further indication we know too little about what drives climate change and specifically what drives abrupt change of the kind the alarmists seem intent on scaring us with.
    • thumb
      Feb 27 2013: Daryl, I have a question. Do you think we know precisely the clinical validity of lung cancer induced by smoking? Will you call anti-smoking campaign on health ground 'alarmist'?
      • thumb
        Feb 27 2013: Pabitra, No, to answer your question but …Would you conclude lung cancer is only caused by smoking? The truth is we probably know more about what causes lung cancer than we do about what causes Climate Change, especially "abrupt" climate change.

        I'm sure you've heard of "Clouding the issue with facts"…this is where the current global conversation on Climate Change is… a relatively small amount of information is being used and abused to declare emergencies and generally incite a panic mentality in order to draw attention to this issue and/or sell someones idea or book or maintain a status quo to our peril. The biggest and more dangerous result of this approach is a confusing mess of rhetoric on both sides which render Lost any appropriate response and risks unreasonable costs in time and limited resources again, to our peril. An interesting yet little known event has occurred over the last 150 years or so….the oceans have risen 1 foot….there is no panic, no call for international resources to be spent to mitigate this event…should there be? All I'm saying is that we need a responsible conversation about this issue and a reasonable plan to deal with it in a reasonable timeframe.
        • thumb
          Feb 28 2013: I find it difficult to agree with you that there is no reason to panic if the sea level rises by 1 foot. Maldivians will also not agree I guess.
          Admitted that the science behind Climate Change or Global Warming is not easy to grasp as Climate Science is a vastly complex discipline. But Climate Change and it's possible effects have been thoroughly studied, there are tons of peer reviewed research literature on these and there is a majority consensus within the international scientific communities about it's validity.
          What I think is major impediment in popular awareness about it is lack of political will.
    • Feb 27 2013: Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I watched the video and I like his thought process. Kind of like medical triage in a disaster.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.