When mario molina and f. sherwood rowland first presented their findings about the threat of cfcs, the industrial chemists who developed cfcs scoffed at their warnings. they argued that cfcs were known to be very nonreactive. would you categorize the reaction of these scientists as science or pseudoscience? explain.

Pseudoscience contains the statements or practicles that are trying to be proved as scientific and explain the facts but are not accurate actually with the scientific method.

The CFC are quite reactive to produce chlorine radicel which results in ozone depletion and thus is reactive but according to the arguments of scientist that it is non reactive indicates that they are not having any factual description about the non reactivity of the CFC and thus the argument comes under pseudoscience.

1.43 x 10^-11 j the guy commented the awnser just making sure u see it .