Say, whatever happened to that "big hole in the ozone?"

[mamooth]

If course it does idiot...it just isn't as large as the hole you find over the south pole because it is never tipped so far away from the sun as in the south...

I'll never get tired of laughing at that insanity.

Here is an article talking about the ozone hole's existence at the north pole, but they don't have any more of a clue why it exists than you.

Actually, they explained it quite well. Maybe you could have a grownup explain it to you.

When the team that discovered the ozone hole in the south left, it was their intention to wait till the arctic winter and go there to observe it as well...geez you are a f'ing stupid old woman

I don't appreciate being stalked by predatory queers.

Hell hairball, the ozone layer over your own house is damned near depleted every night but come morning and that incoming UV from the sun...it's right back in place.

That's almost as nutty as your variable-earth-tilting theory.

So, did you know the ozone depletes very little during the winter when no sunlight is present? Strange. According to your theory, that's when it should be depleting. Instead, it's in spring, when the sunlight returns, that the ozone gets munched. Oh snap, the actual data once more pointed out how you're just making up crazy stories.

 

[mamooth]

why is it colder in the antarctic?

It's good that you've finally figured out colder temperature is related to ozone destruction. You're only 35 years behind mainstream science now. That's pretty good, for deniers.

One problem, though. The other deniers say it's entirely about sunlight, and has nothing to do with temperature. You need to get together with them and come up with a unified theory.

 

[jc456]

Hey tooth, what loses heat faster water or land in the poles?

 

[jc456]

why is it colder in the antarctic?

It's good that you've finally figured out colder temperature is related to ozone destruction. You're only 35 years behind mainstream science now. That's pretty good, for deniers.

One problem, though. The other deniers say it's entirely about sunlight, and has nothing to do with temperature. You need to get together with them and come up with a unified theory.

Yes, UV rays are needed to produce ozone. Period.

Also, there isn't ozone at night when it is cold and there are no UV rays. so even the Arctic has an ozone hole. Anywhere where UV rays are not present will lose ozone. Do you challenge that?

 

[mamooth]

Hey tooth, what loses heat faster water or land in the poles?

Agani, I charge money to educate people who are trying to waste my time by deflecting with irrelevant questions. If you have a point to make, then make it, simply and directly. Don't try to evade with these endless stupid questions.

Yes, UV rays are needed to produce ozone. Period.

Then why do you keep bringing up cold?

Also, there isn't ozone at night when it is cold and there are no UV rays.

Yes there is. The ozone layer does not vanish each night. You and SSDD seem to be confusing surface ozone with stratospheric ozone.

so even the Arctic has an ozone hole.

Yes, a much smaller one. The two determining factors are cold temperatures making ice-crystal clouds, and having ozone-munching chemicals around. The arctic isn't as cold, so it loses much less ozone.

Anywhere where UV rays are not present will lose ozone. Do you challenge that?

No, but I'll point out rate matters. The stratosphere loses ozone each night, but does not lose significant ozone each night.

The ozone layer, does, however, deplete each spring at the poles when the sun returns. The sunlight doesn't make the ozone, it _destroys_ the ozone. Hence, your theory is disproved by the direct observations.

 

[jc456]

Hey tooth, what loses heat faster water or land in the poles?

Agani, I charge money to educate people who are trying to waste my time by deflecting with irrelevant questions. If you have a point to make, then make it, simply and directly. Don't try to evade with these endless stupid questions.

Yes, UV rays are needed to produce ozone. Period.

Then why do you keep bringing up cold?

Also, there isn't ozone at night when it is cold and there are no UV rays.

Yes there is. The ozone layer does not vanish each night. You and SSDD seem to be confusing surface ozone with stratospheric ozone.

so even the Arctic has an ozone hole.

Yes, a much smaller one. The two determining factors are cold temperatures making ice-crystal clouds, and having ozone-munching chemicals around. The arctic isn't as cold, so it loses much less ozone.

Anywhere where UV rays are not present will lose ozone. Do you challenge that?

No, but I'll point out rate matters. The stratosphere loses ozone each night, but does not lose significant ozone each night.

The ozone layer, does, however, deplete each spring at the poles when the sun returns. The sunlight doesn't make the ozone, it _destroys_ the ozone. Hence, your theory is disproved by the direct observations.

source

excerpt from NASA
"These reactions convert the inactive chlorine reservoir chemicals into more active forms, especially chlorine gas (Cl2). When the sunlight returns to the South Pole in October, UV light rapidly breaks the bond between the two chlorine atoms, releasing free chlorine into the stratosphere, where it takes part in reactions that destroy ozone molecules while regenerating the chlorine (known as a catalytic reaction). A catalytic reaction allows a single chlorine atom to destroy thousands of ozone molecules. Bromine is involved in a second catalytic reaction with chlorine that contributes a large fraction of ozone loss. The ozone hole grows throughout the early spring until temperatures warm and the polar vortex weakens, ending the isolation of the air in the polar vortex. As air from the surrounding latitudes mixes into the polar region, the ozone-destroying forms of chlorine disperse. The ozone layer stabilizes until the following spring."

 

[mamooth]

excerpt from NASA

I appreciate you posting that, as it confirmed everything I said.

Maybe SSDD would like to explain why, if (as his theory says) lack of sunlight destroys ozone and sunlight makes it, the ozone hole forms after the sunlight returns, and not during the time of darkness.

 

[elektra]

What happened to the hole on the ozone? You cant fix it with a solar panel or wind mill.

 

[jc456]

excerpt from NASA

I appreciate you posting that, as it confirmed everything I said.

Maybe SSDD would like to explain why, if (as his theory says) lack of sunlight destroys ozone and sunlight makes it, the ozone hole forms after the sunlight returns, and not during the time of darkness.

Well I posted the excerpt it explains it quite well what happens when the sun returns it's called Weather. You should really go read it.