Hyperlinks And Copied Documents
Technology0 min ago
Carbon Dioxide "Crisis" ?
The main effect of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is to stimulate plant growth, this is known as the 'fertilisation effect'. Research & careful studies have shown that this effect is indeed making the planet greener thanks to the increased CO2, & yet we are told that we need to prevent any further increase in order to become 'green' & prevent the planet from becoming marginally warmer.
Are we really at what Johnson calls, 'one minute to midnight on the doomsday clock' & would he be not better sticking to reading Homer than dishing out pseudo-science?
Are we really at what Johnson calls, 'one minute to midnight on the doomsday clock' & would he be not better sticking to reading Homer than dishing out pseudo-science?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Let's just go through this thread. So far:
1. You've found something interesting but well-known to Climate Scientists, and presented it as if it's a revelation.
2. You read a link that contradicted your initial position, but seemed to think that it in fact agreed with you.
3. You effectively accused me of fabricating a quote from that same link, by suggesting it was only my opinion.
4. When it was pointed out that it was, in fact, a quote from the author of the paper you think supports you, you then dismissed it as only their opinion.
5. In spite of all these basic errors, you're refused to acknowledge them. Instead, you've decided to insult my scientific career prospects, presumably based on the back of a review post here, rather than by researching who I am, what I've done, what papers I've published, how they've been received by the community, etc etc.
You have some nerve, I'll give you that. I can assure you that nobody is more aware of my shortcomings as a scientist than I am, but if you think you understand how to do research better than I do, then think again. Thank you for your advice, but I suggest that you listen to it yourself first.
1. You've found something interesting but well-known to Climate Scientists, and presented it as if it's a revelation.
2. You read a link that contradicted your initial position, but seemed to think that it in fact agreed with you.
3. You effectively accused me of fabricating a quote from that same link, by suggesting it was only my opinion.
4. When it was pointed out that it was, in fact, a quote from the author of the paper you think supports you, you then dismissed it as only their opinion.
5. In spite of all these basic errors, you're refused to acknowledge them. Instead, you've decided to insult my scientific career prospects, presumably based on the back of a review post here, rather than by researching who I am, what I've done, what papers I've published, how they've been received by the community, etc etc.
You have some nerve, I'll give you that. I can assure you that nobody is more aware of my shortcomings as a scientist than I am, but if you think you understand how to do research better than I do, then think again. Thank you for your advice, but I suggest that you listen to it yourself first.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.