I'm sick of repeating myself, you just keep on going off in a different tanget each time.
ONE MORE TIME:
The 'pollution' the original poster was refering to was VISIBLE SMOG in the shy over the city.
CO2 is INVISIBLE and it has nothing to do with the 'pollution' he could SEE over the city.
I can't be any clearer.
If you want to argue that CO2 is a pollutant, that's different matter, it has NOTHING to do with the visible air 'pollution' ie SMOG.
By the same token you could a perfectly clear sky over a city but it could still have a high concentration of CO2 even though you can't SEE it. -------------------- "Nor does that research cover wastes exhaled by people & animals. "
>>>LOL, what a stupid statement.... tell them to stop breathing!!!!
