Ozone Depletion NOT MAN caused!

Discussion in 'Environment' started by westwall, Nov 12, 2010.

  1. westwall
    Online

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    24,370
    Thanks Received:
    3,899
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +4,595
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
  2. Meister
    Offline

    Meister VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    25,900
    Thanks Received:
    8,097
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Conservative part of the Northwest
    Ratings:
    +8,098
    I'm waiting for roxie to come on and say they aren't peer reviewed scientists. :lol:
     
  3. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,455
    Thanks Received:
    578
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +689
    Oh my! not another manmade catastrophy that is found to be heavily influenced by previously unknown natural causes!

    pretty soon I am going to stop believing that mankind will cease to exist in <insert favourite number> years.
     
  4. DiveCon
    Offline

    DiveCon gone

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    48,025
    Thanks Received:
    3,386
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +3,386
    :silence:
     
  5. westwall
    Online

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    24,370
    Thanks Received:
    3,899
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +4,595
    Yes it's deafening isn't it?:lol::lol::lol: The alarmists have spoken!
     
  6. mdn2000
    Offline

    mdn2000 BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,766
    Thanks Received:
    278
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    conservative hell california
    Ratings:
    +278
    Laugh now, we will see who is laughing after Old Crock posts a link.
     
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,591
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,594
    Well Ozone is destroyed by cosmic rays, and if the cosmic rays intensify due to changes in solar activity, that certainly sounds plausible.

    Consider the possibility that both manmade pollution AND solar activity can likewise have that effect.


    That I don't doubt one bit.
     
  8. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    35,125
    Thanks Received:
    3,792
    Trophy Points:
    247
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +4,180
    Well, Editec has done it again. I suspect he did not even look at the article, but make a wise guess. What the article says is that cosmic rays and the CFCs work in a synergic relationship to deplete the O3 layer.

    As for the rest of you assholes, did you ever even consider actually reading the article? Apparently you did not read the article, Walleyes, or you would have seen the following paragraph.


    http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~qblu/Lu-2009PRL.pdf

    Then the
    evidence of the correlation between CRs, chlorofluorocarbon
    (CFC) dissociation, and O3 loss was found from
    satellite data by Lu and Sanche
    [8]: the O3 hole is exactly
    located in the polar stratosphere and at the altitude of
    18 km where the CR ionization shows a maximum.
    CRs are the only electron source in the stratosphere, while
    halogen (Cl, Br)-containing molecules are long known to
    have extremely large cross sections of dissociative attachments
    of low-energy electrons [9]. The latter reaction will
    be greatly enhanced when halogenated molecules are adsorbed
    or buried at the surfaces of polar molecular ice,
    relevant to polar stratospheric cloud (PSC) ice in the winter
    polar stratosphere, as firstly discovered by Lu and Madey
    [6,7] and subsequently confirmed by others in experiments
    and theoretical calculations [10&#8211;16]. For example, the
    dissociative attachment cross section at 0 eV electrons
    for CF2Cl2 adsorbed on the surface of water ice has been
    measured to be 1  1014 cm2, which is about 1  106
    times the photolysis cross section of CF2Cl2 [6,10]. As
    many challenges as the CR-cloud model has received [4,5],
    however, the CR-related O3 depletion mechanism has also
    been the subject of strong debate [17&#8211;23].
     
  9. Intense
    Offline

    Intense Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    44,911
    Thanks Received:
    5,842
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,844
    Actually I did take the time to read it. You should too. :lol:

    One might argue that a simply time correlation does not
    guarantee a physical mechanism. However, there exist the
    following facts. (1) As discussed above, there is no alternative
    mechanism for the observed time correlation between
    polar ozone loss and CR intensity, which cannot be
    explained by the photochemical model predicting a monotonic
    recovery (increase) of the polar total ozone since
    2000. (2) There is also a strong spatial correlation observed:
    the O3 hole is exactly located in the lower polar
    stratosphere at 18 km where the ionization rate of CRs
    producing electrons is the strongest [8,23]. (3) There are
    known PSC ice particles in the winter polar stratosphere.
    (4) Laboratory measurements and theoretical calculations
    have clearly demonstrated that ice surfaces can trap electrons
    and enhance the electron-induced reactions of halogenated
    species (inorganic and organic) at the surfaces by
    orders of magnitude, compared with corresponding gasphase
    reactions [6–16]. (5) Even if one still assumes that
    the photochemical model were the dominant mechanism,
    FIG. 4 (color online). Percentage variation of mean total ozone
    vs CR intensity with all the data from Figs. 1–3: solid circles for
    annual O3 data with latitudes 0–60 S, upper triangles for
    October O3 with latitudes 60–90 S, down triangles and diamonds
    for annual O3 at Halley and Faraday/Vernadsky, respectively.
    To plot all these data together, the October and annual O3
    data for the polar region were reduced by factors of 5 and 2.5,
    respectively. The solid line is the best fit to the data, giving a
    linear equation (see text).
    PRL 102, 118501 (2009) PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
    week ending
    20 MARCH 2009
    118501-3
    then a small amplitude (10%) of the CR-intensity oscillation
    in an 11-yr cycle would cause a nonobservable variation
    of the polar total ozone. To illustrate this, assuming
    that the photochemical model accounted for 70% of O3
    loss in the polar stratosphere (i.e., only the rest of 30%
    were caused by the CR mechanism), then a variation of
    10% in the CR intensity would cause only a 3% variation
    of the polar total ozone, which would be even lower than
    the fluctuation level of the ozone data (Fig. 2). This is
    contradictory to the observed modulation amplitude of
    about 12% in the polar total O3 during an 11-yr cycle, as
    shown in Fig. 2. Thus, the above facts (1)–(5) force one to
    conclude that the CR-driven electron-induced reaction is
    the dominant mechanism for causing the polar O3 hole.
    This mechanism must be input to remove the large discrepancy
    between the simulated results and the observed
    O3 loss [25,26].
    Finally, a correct mechanism should be able to not only
    explain the observed data, but also to predict future trends
    of the O3 hole. Since the 11-yr cycle variation of the CR
    intensity is predictable, the CR-driven electron reaction
    mechanism leads to direct predictions of one of the severest
    O3 losses (due to the CR peak) in 2008–2009, and of
    probably another maximum around 2019–2020 if a large
    halogen amount is still in the stratosphere.

    http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~qblu/Lu-2009PRL.pdf
     
  10. mdn2000
    Offline

    mdn2000 BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,766
    Thanks Received:
    278
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    conservative hell california
    Ratings:
    +278
    The link, I told you guys, and whats funny Old Crock tells accuses others of not reading links. How many times have Old Crock's own links contradicted Old Crock, showing either Old Crock did not read his own link or he did not comprehend his own link.

    I am on night shift, its the end of a 12 hour night, thanks for a great laugh "Old Crock", you can be a riot of ignorance and stupidity.
     

Share This Page