Quote from: TECSHARE on April 28, 2016, 07:08:48 AM

Quote from: m0gliE on April 27, 2016, 04:08:32 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 27, 2016, 11:34:45 AM

Quote from: m0gliE on April 27, 2016, 08:08:37 AM

Seems like you're not. This why you shouldn't talk about things you don't have a clue about.
"Our studies show that globally, volcanoes on land and under the sea release a total of about 200 million tonnes of CO2 annually. " http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html
the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes

It means it would take 1000 years of eruption to compensate one year of human made CO2.

But please, continue to show us how educated you are.

So you you are telling me that they are accurately gauging every volcano on Earth including on land and under the ocean when they are only actually studying a handful of volcanoes? One of the rules in science is you need to have an appropriate sample size in order to get any kind of reasonable estimate, and they have neither. Try again comrade.

They have the exact number and size of volcanoes on earth. Then they studied a volcano. Then they just made an estimation of the CO2 emited by the whole volcanoes. What's so hard to understand?
Of course they're not precise! They can't be! But you're arguing they're wrong by a 10 000 order? ^^

Oh and btw I'm not your comrade, you surely don't deserve my friendship Wink

No, they don't know the exact number of volcanoes on Earth, that is an asinine statement.

Sorry they know the exact number of eruptive volcanoes of the past 70 years, but as an eruptive volcano releases more than 500 times the amount of CO2 the not eruptive one release, unless there is more than 5000 times more unerupting volcanoes than eruptive ones it's enough to make an excellent estimation.

Quote

They also don't even know the exact emissions from the very small handful of volcanoes they actually do test. They take small samples and estimate. When making estimations based on a very small data set within a very small number of actual volcanoes, the estimates will be nowhere near accurate.

Where do you take that from? They simply estimate the amount of CO2 released on average by active volcanoes everyday since 2011! How is that not precise? And I answered you above concerning the number of volcanoes.

Quote

You even said yourself they can't be precise yet you are pretending the estimates are magically accurate some how in the same breath.

Nothing is precise in science. Everything has some kind of innacuracy that's the very point of Quantum Physics.
Difference is you're actually claiming they're not wrong, but wrong by an order of magnitude of more than 10 000. That's how wrong they should be in order to make your claim true (claim that you absolutely didn't prove btw).

Quote

P.S. I was not offering you my friendship, I was just addressing you as the communist you are.

I'm no more communist that you're "educated". It's not because your limited brain can only separate the world into two parts, the red evil communists and the blue good capitalists that the world is actually divided that way Roll Eyes