While I'm amused by your 'batte of witts', you still have failed an incredibly basic challenge.
You provided a source, I pointed out that your dead scientist used trickery to try to make a point, you are still unable to verify or deny this claim.
#1 I did not provide the source,
#2 I do not have to verify or deny anything you simpleton
Dr. Carter raise questions about the time references used in studies which your absolute conclusion is based upon
You have to provide answers to those questions or forever have doubt cast upon your absolute position
That's how it works you mental midget
For someone who claims to have studied science, you appear totally unable to do even basic research.
Well pretty much the first thing one learns in science is that scientific research usually provides a conclusion defined by a certain confidence level, which is never 100%
The second thing one learns is if someone is taking an absolute position, their understanding is questionable
Pray tell us the type of equipment is used to detect CO2 in the ppm range?
There may be more than one type
Then explain the fundamental detection mechanism for each
After that you could perhaps explain how unique detection methods maybe required for some of other nasty's in the Atmosphere ie oxides of sulphur and nitrogen and what their detection limits are
Then perhaps you can quantifiably explain how one measures a ton of CO2
My guess is you do not have a clue, yet you feel you are able to question the character of a scientist who obtained a doctorate? and be absolute about it
