Global Warming: A Myth or Reality

Student's Name
Professor's Name
Subject
Global Warming: A Myth or Reality
Global warming, a debate spearheaded by world leaders and experts alike, has been a contested moot topic for an exceptionally long time. The evident climatic changes about global warming have remained the most indistinct, contentious, and vastly disputed marvels in contemporary times. It is a phenomenon that has attracted divergent opinions, with the protagonists linking the destructive climatic changes to increased industrial carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, while the opponents are fervently arguing their case with the same vigor. Nonetheless, global warming's effects are evident in the recent unpredictable climatic changes that have ravaged and devastated the world. It is, therefore, a reality that needs to be conclusively addressed sooner rather than later.
Inferring from the two divides, the proponents affirm the reality of global warming by citing its influence on the climate variations witnessed in recent years due to compounded greenhouse gas emissions (Proctor). In contrast, the antagonists reject the entire concept as a sheer myth that is significantly non-apprehensive and without any scientific basis connecting it to human-caused activities (Wollstein). According to Wollstein, global warming advocates support their argument by proposing that the increased anthropogenic activities that have resulted in increased atmospheric greenhouse emissions like carbon dioxide (CO2) are solely responsible for global warming and the unpredictable climatic changes. Albeit experts are yet to present clear and broad scientific evidence associating ozone layer depletion (the main activity in global warming) with climatic changes due to enhanced greenhouse emissions, the latest ice cover depletion, suspicious climatic changes, and steadily increasing temperatures deconstruct the global warming myth analogy (IPCC).
The flurry of unprecedented global disparities in climatic changes from the past decade has recently intensified global warming concerns among world leaders. For instance, the 1997 El Niño and the 2019 World Meteorological Organization (WMO) report on increased temperatures above Earth's pre-industrial average temperatures are among the signals that have lately inspired the debate tackling global warming and rescuing the world from an imminent tragedy. World leaders have held numerous conferences, like the Kyoto conference of 1997 in Japan and the 2015 Paris Climate Accord, to discuss global warming's detrimental realities. The talks majored on finding viable solutions to mitigate its already destructive effects and prevent its escalation. The Kyoto conference ended with consensual international decree signage to decrease other greenhouse emissions to control global warming in an agreement dubbed the "Kyoto Protocol" (COP-3). On the other hand, The Paris Accord limited global warming temperatures to less than 2 degrees Celcius above pre-industrial temperatures.
As highlighted above, both conferences portrayed the global warming issue as a reality that requires human attention. The main culprit pointed out in its advancement was the increased greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities. Moreover, global warming's side effects are catastrophically evident, citing the 1997 El Niño and the 2015 global temperature increase. Therefore, the phenomenon is a reality, and terming it a myth is a fallacy by itself.
Numerous climate changes happening are enough evidence that global warming is a natural and devastating calamity. The usual narrative around the subject from the world's influential institutions and people has been that climate change is already enhancing the intensity and frequency of wildfires and extreme weather events (EWEs). The result has been a reduction in crop yields, available water, increased diseases, human mortality, poverty, hunger, and a resultant shrinking in productivity of the species habitat and biosphere. It is a general claim that those mentioned above and other climate change impacts weaken environmental and human wellbeing and are likely to lessen them more if radical measures to attain a hastened zero net greenhouse emissions are not implemented (UNFCCC).
Climate change is the sole best determinant of global warming. Empirical evidence gathered over time usually showcases a significant change in major weather patterns in a region. For scientists to assert the integrity of climate change as a critical global warming determinant, climate change is typically studied over a long time, often more than 30 years. To effectively use climate change empirical evidence, scientists ensure that the period is long enough to outline a minimum of dual non-intersecting thirty-year periods. Additionally, the change period should include at least one or more full periods comprising any substantial oceanic or atmospheric cycles that could considerably influence the region under study. For instance, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) has been speculated to affect droughts and precipitation on the Atlantic's sides. Moreover, North Atlantic Basin's hurricane activity has a sixty-to-eighty-year period (Trenberth et al.). Hence, in determining that region's trends, the temporal record is sufficiently long enough to cover a couple of the overlapping periods.
As previously noted, the underlying cause of global warming, which has attracted vicious debates around the same, is the unparalleled climate varia...