ένα ερώτημα πού τεθηκε στον keith strong σχετικά με τους επιστημονες πού δέν βρισκονται στή λιστα
επειδη αρνηθηκαν την θεωρια Global Warming λογω CO2 αξίζει να τη δούμε όπως καί την απαντηση
ερωτημα:
The thousands of scientists not put on the "top Scientist list" because they oppose the theory, some of whom are mentioned but want their names removed from the IPCC report as contributers even though they argue against the "Theory".
There are many reasons why this Theory is false, too many to argue with you over, especially when you debate the issue calling people "Stupid".
I believe the man made carbon dioxide levels are 0,5% of what is released into the atmosphere, valcanoes emit vast amounts more than we do including rotting vegetation. Having said that, it is illogical to say that CO2 is even the cause, plus the earth is in constant temp fluctuation.
I consider both arguements objectively with an unbiased view, you obviously do not.
απαντηση τού keith strong :
What "top Scientist list"? Please give me a link to such a list, I want to see if I am on it. If you cannot give me the list then it is a figment of your imagination.
A scientist who opposes a theory should have published papers saying so - please give references to such papers. If you cannot give me the references then they are another figment of your imagination.
"There are many reasons why this Theory is false, too many to argue with you over" The usual cop out which translates to I don't have any reasons that will standup to scientific scrutiny. I'll repeat to you what I have said to others (and never gotten a satisfactory reply or in most cases any form of reply): Choose your absolute strongest argument against it and watch me destroy it.
"especially when you debate the issue calling people "Stupid"" If you had bothered to watch the video, you would have realized that it was not me calling anyone stupid but that video was a response to a YTer saying exactly that to me.
"I believe the man made carbon dioxide levels are 0,5% of what is released into the atmosphere" True, so what?
"valcanoes emit vast amounts more than we do" WRONG! they emit on average annually 1% of what we do (USGS)
The point is that natural sources emit much more CO2 than human sources (fossil fuel burning, concrete, and deforestation) as you stated. But what you have forgotten (deliberately) that they also absorb the same amount plus a fraction of what we emit. We emit 9 Gtons of carbon per year but the oceans and plants absorb 4 Gtons of that. That means we add 5 Gtons to the atmosphere EACH YEAR - its cumulative. That is why CO2 levels remained approximately constant for the last 10000 years until 1800 when we started the industrial revolution - see, for example,
https://skepticalscience.com/Is-CO2-a-pollutant.html
Perhaps you should look at the problem again with a less biased view.
μεταφρ στό σημείο πού ενδιαφερει:
"Πιστεύω ότι ο άνθρωπος τά επίπεδα διοξειδίου του άνθρακα πού προκαλεί είναι το 0,5% του τι απελευθερώνεται στην ατμόσφαιρα" Αλήθεια, έτσι τι;
"τα ηφαίστεια εκπέμπουν τεράστιες ποσότητες περισσότερο από ό, τι κάνουμε" ΣΦΑΛΜΑ! εκπέμπουν κατά μέσο όρο ετησίως το 1% αυτού που κάνουμε (USGS)
Το θέμα είναι ότι οι φυσικές πηγές εκπέμπουν πολύ περισσότερο CO2 από ότι οι ανθρώπινες πηγές (καύση ορυκτών καυσίμων, σκυρόδεμα και αποψίλωση) όπως δηλώσατε. Αλλά τι έχετε ξεχάσει (σκόπιμα) ότι απορροφούν επίσης το ίδιο ποσό συν ένα κλάσμα του τι εκπέμπουμε. Εκπέμπουμε 9 Gtons άνθρακα ετησίως, αλλά οι ωκεανοί και τα φυτά απορροφούν 4 Gtons από αυτό. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι προσθέτουμε 5 Gtons στην ατμόσφαιρα ΚΑΘΕ ΕΤΟΣ - το σωρευτικό. Αυτός είναι ο λόγος για τον οποίο τα επίπεδα του CO2 παρέμειναν περίπου σταθερά τα τελευταία 10000 χρόνια μέχρι το 1800 όταν ξεκινήσαμε τη βιομηχανική επανάσταση - βλ., Για παράδειγμα,
https://skepticalscience.com/Is-CO2-a-pollutant.html
Ίσως πρέπει να κοιτάξετε ξανά το πρόβλημα με μια λιγότερο προκατειλημμένη άποψη.
