From dictionary.com:
any substance, as certain chemicals or waste products, that renders the air, soil, water, or other natural resource harmful or unsuitable for a specific purpose.
Can you link me to where you’ve found that “pollutant” is defined as a nearly infinite group of compounds but explicitly excludes CO2? This is the first time I’ve heard this.
Where in the world are you getting this "nearly infinite" business? I never said anything like that, in fact I gave you a short list. Go back and read what I wrote, I feel like you skimmed it or something.
And your dictionary definition is problematic because it doesn't define "unsuitable for a specific purpose". It's basically a circular definition. I will then ask you please define "unsuitable for a specific purpose" and we are back where we started.
You said that only nitrogen, oxygen, CO2 and “some noble gases” should be in the atmosphere. Everything else (such as salt) is a pollutant.
How many compounds are there that are not nitrogen, oxygen, CO2 and “some noble gases”? In my estimation that is uncountable but maybe you have some hard numbers?
edit:
“Suitable purpose“ for me would be creating or maintaining an environment that sustains human life.
Is your “checkmate” position something like “Hah! In my dictionary, ‘suitable purpose’ only relates to underwater welding, root beer production, and synthetic diamond formation!”
I personally find moving goalposts to avoid talking about concrete things in concrete terms to be problematic, but I understand that if a person is quite jaded about the future of life on earth that it might seem that the only thing worth debating is semantics. Maybe avoiding boredom matters more than attempting to avert catastrophe.
And? There are uncountable pollutants - why is that an issue? None of those other things belong in the air, in any amount.
> would be creating or maintaining an environment that sustains human life.
So my small campfire where I burn plastic is perfectly fine then? After all the toxins released are minor and rapidly dissipate, so the environment still sustains human life. Your definition doesn't even acknowledge that you can sustain life, but everyone has asthma because of all the particulate matter in the air.
By your definition there are no pollutants. Or at best you can only talk about them in bulk once they reach levels sufficient to kill, but never about individual releases.
By my definition each individual release of something that doesn't belong in the air is pollution. I find my definition much more usable and useful.
> By my definition each individual release of something that doesn't belong in the air is pollution.
Does your classification of CO2 have a real upper limit of ppm wherein it becomes considered a pollutant? Or is it just “all plastic supply burned + 1”
Can you provide a link to where you got your definition of atmospheric pollution? I have tried Google and DDG and I haven’t found anyone claiming that “pollution is everything but this small handful of gases” in anything scientific. I keep finding it as being relative to outcomes and not a function of what is or isn’t in an Excel column.
Sure: "A pollutant or novel entity is a substance or energy introduced into the environment that has undesired effects, or adversely affects the usefulness of a resource." From Wikipedia.
A "novel entity" i.e. anything that doesn't belong in the air. Wikipedia adds that it must in some way harm things to be a pollutant, which is a reasonable addition.
I am glad that we agree that “pollutant” is relative to outcomes. I appreciate you amending your previous statement that “pollutant” is just a word referring to anything but the high school textbook reference list of expected atmospheric gases. It is an indeed silly view that no dictionary, encyclopedia or academic paper states. It’s so silly that to hold such a position consistently would essentially mean that “daytime” is meaningfully “a period marked by light pollution” since the normal state of the universe is darkness. Imagine having such a useless and meaningless definition of “pollution”!
I have a couple more questions!
If you hosted an indoor buffet and you needed to keep the chafing dishes warm, would you opt to burn ethanol or (if it were cheaper) the shredded remains of takeout containers?
and
Why does burning plastic have black smoke and ethanol not?
Can you link me to where you’ve found that “pollutant” is defined as a nearly infinite group of compounds but explicitly excludes CO2? This is the first time I’ve heard this.