1) CO2 is a greenhouse gas, right? ^^
2) We are releasing more CO2 (combustion of fossil fuels a major one)
3) More CO2 (Q2) means more heat retention (Q1), right?
1) In a (relativly) small, closed and controlled environment. YES....On a global scale - never PROVEN.
2) YES - CO2 "production" has risen to almost THREE times the amount it was in 1980.
3) WRONG - In my opinion. See my answer to two, BUT temperatures have not increased AT ALL since 1980.
For more info on 3), look-up our Aussie Pollie Senator Steve Fielding with a piece of paper he is trying
to show to Al Gore. I have seen this same (basic) information from several different sources,
for several years.So because you do not know how a computer works on a binary/electronic level you cannot educate people about how effective they are at number crunching? I'm sure even if he had a degree in a relevant field, he would still be questioned.
At least he is trying to persuade, driven by passion and a deep belief in what he speaks. Going by what you said, does that not mean one cannot argue against it if one didn't know the molecular chemistry of the gases, etc?
Not QUITE, but on the right track.
Im glad he is trying, no argument. He's making people sit up and think for a change.
But to use your analogy, if someone was trying to explain to me about a computers ability to number-crunch,
(and we will assume I dont even know how to turn one on, but I know of the existance of memory chips)
I then ask hime how it storess the numbers before the crunching.
If the "teacher" then waffles on about storing the data as X's and O's on a magnetic tape,
and I know thats not just wrong, but its seriously retarded, do you think I am going to
seriously consider anything else he says, like whether a computer really IS a good number cruncher?
Thats the impression I got from two different seminars of his. I went to the second
because I thought the first one may have been due to jet-lag or hang-over.
I credit the guy, he believes, and he's passionate about it. Any good cause needs that.
[EDIT] And it is a good cause. He is trying to explain things he "only-just" understands
to people who have been working in those science profession for decades.
He JUST needs more "script" or "Q & A" support from othr professionals in order to convince
professionals. Same in any other "sales" situation. He is selling an IDEA.I just believe the idea he is selling is incorrect.
