Final answer:
The first question is scientific because it asks for measurable data regarding the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels over the past century, which can be observed and measured through scientific methods. The second question is not scientific because it involves ethical considerations and value judgments about human behavior, which are not empirical or measurable by scientific standards.
Step-by-step explanation:
The first question, 'How quickly have carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere increased in the past 100 years?' is a scientific question because it asks for data that can be measured, observed, and analyzed scientifically. Measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels can be made using various technologies and instruments such as infrared gas analyzers or satellite sensors, and analyses of ice core samples can provide historical data. Scientists have determined that carbon dioxide levels have risen from about 280 parts per million (ppm) to levels exceeding 400 ppm in this time frame, with a significant portion of that increase occurring in recent decades due to industrial activities.
The second question, 'Should humans stop damaging the atmosphere by releasing carbon dioxide?', is not a scientific question as it asks for a value judgment and involves ethical considerations. It is concerned with what humans ought to do, rather than what is empirically observable or measurable. This falls more into the realm of environmental policy and ethics than into the empirical domain of science.
Pose two scientific questions whose pursuit could lead to an improved understanding:
- What mechanisms control the variabilities in temperature acclimation in different species?
- How do atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations model and predict future global temperatures?