The "OZONE HOLE" scam was the pre-curser to the Global Warmists movement.

[cnm]

You won't admit your most egregious errors, let alone your more subtle ones. Science based!

 

[SSDD]

You say it's 'tilted'?

Are you saying that the earth isn't tilted on its axis?

 

[SSDD]

You won't admit your most egregious errors, let alone your more subtle ones. Science based!

And you apparently aren't able to discuss the topic at all. How unsurprising is that?

• Ozone forms as a result of incoming UV breaking O2 molecules into O atoms...some of which form O3 molecules
• The Life span of an O molecule at 20km is about 0.002 seconds and at 32 km, it is about 0.04 seconds...those O atoms become O2 again, or O3 in small fractions of a second.
• When there is no incoming UV, there is no ozone formation
• The life span of an O3 molecule at 20km is about 1000 seconds
• The life span of an O3 molecule at 32km is about 4200 seconds
• I repeat, when there is no incoming UV, there is no production of O3

Now...use your brain for just a minute if you are able. If there is no production of O3 when there is no incoming UV and if the lifespan of an O3 molecule in the stratosphere, depending on altitude is somewhere between 1000 and 4200 seconds, How much O3 do you think is left in the atmosphere on the dark side of earth....say 20 minutes before the first UV of the day hits the atmosphere and O3 production begins again?

Now...how does that relate to the "ozone holes" over the polar regions during their respective winters?

 

[JoeB131]

Let me guess...you are stupid enough to believe the ozone scam.

again, who you going to believe... Scientists or some guy who listens to whatever shit the Koch Brothers have ladeled out to him on Hate Radio.

here's the real problem. We solved a problem through international agreement and government regulation. We found alternatives to CFC's and we barely noticed the difference.

You see, there used to be a time when Conservatives accepted science. Maybe they disagreed with liberals on Government vs. Free Market solutions, but they didn't pretend a problem didn't exist.

So Nixon created the EPA to stop pollution and Ronald Reagan, that Godless Commie Lover, signed the Montreal Protocol to reduce CFC's.

That was before the Koch-Suckers took over the GOP and got into the crazy of " Well, if Science limits the ability of rich people to make an obscene profit, we oppose it! Fuck Science!"

 

[SSDD]

again, who you going to believe... Scientists or some guy who listens to whatever shit the Koch Brothers have ladeled out to him on Hate Radio.

Hey, it is the guy with no informed opinion of his own again. Tell me, do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your claims regarding my radio listening habits? Didn't think so.

here's the real problem. We solved a problem through international agreement and government regulation. We found alternatives to CFC's and we barely noticed the difference.

Which problem? The "hole" has always been there during the polar winter. It is a naturally occurring phenomenon. Exactly which problem do you think we fixed? As to hardly noticing a difference, talk to engineers in the refrigeration business. The replacements are less efficient than freon and therefore more energy is required to do the same work as was possible with freon.

You see, there used to be a time when Conservatives accepted science. Maybe they disagreed with liberals on Government vs. Free Market solutions, but they didn't pretend a problem didn't exist.

Conservatives do accept science...generally speaking though, conservatives are more informed than liberals in the sciences and as such, are better able to recognize, and separate pseudoscience from actual science...and generally, we don't confuse politics for science...and we take the time to research topics in an attempt to get to the facts of the matter.

This difference is obvious in the conversation between us. I am perfectly willing to discuss the science, and am in fact, eager to do so because should you ever come to understand the science, you also will be skeptical of the claims in regard to the ozone holes. You, however apparently can't discuss the science at all since the opinion that was given to you by whoever gave it to you didn't include any actual knowledge about the formation of ozone in the atmosphere, or how long an O3 molecule exists before it breaks up or anything else. You apparently are confined to making guesses about what I do in my free time and arguing with a series of logical fallacies.

So Nixon created the EPA to stop pollution and Ronald Reagan, that Godless Commie Lover, signed the Montreal Protocol to reduce CFC's.

And you believe that accomplished what? And what actual evidence do you have to support the belief?

That was before the Koch-Suckers took over the GOP and got into the crazy of " Well, if Science limits the ability of rich people to make an obscene profit, we oppose it! Fuck Science!"

Again...I am perfectly willing to discuss the science...it is you who is locked in politics and is doing nothing but expressing political opinions? And again, the montreal protocols allowed Dupont to make obscene profits selling an expensive, less efficient refrigerant that they couldn't sell at all while freon was still on the market. The environmental movement was hijacked by Dupont for fun and profit and since you don't know the first thing about the ozone hole, you accept the scam as real, and instantly dislike anyone who points out to you the fact that you were scammed.

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, it is the guy with no informed opinion of his own again. Tell me, do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your claims regarding my radio listening habits? Didn't think so.

You mean other than the mindless talking points you blurt out?

Again...I am perfectly willing to discuss the science...it is you who is locked in politics and is doing nothing but expressing political opinions? And again, the montreal protocols allowed Dupont to make obscene profits selling an expensive, less efficient refrigerant that they couldn't sell at all while freon was still on the market. The environmental movement was hijacked by Dupont for fun and profit and since you don't know the first thing about the ozone hole, you accept the scam as real, and instantly dislike anyone who points out to you the fact that you were scammed.

Naw, man, I really don't think DuPont has enough money to buy off all the scientists all over the world who agreed this was a real problem. Most of us barely noticed Freon went off the market... and my family has worked in HVAC for 70 years.

And whenever someone talks about "vast conspiracies" then I just can't take them fucking seriously.

 

[SSDD]

Hey, it is the guy with no informed opinion of his own again. Tell me, do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your claims regarding my radio listening habits? Didn't think so.

You mean other than the mindless talking points you blurt out?

Guess you didn't read through the thread...I have provided material from NASA, NOAA, ODU, etc...to support my position..It is you who is spewing the typical talking points about koch brothers and deniers, and whatever other political opinion you have been given.

Naw, man, I really don't think DuPont has enough money to buy off all the scientists all over the world who agreed this was a real problem. Most of us barely noticed Freon went off the market... and my family has worked in HVAC for 70 years.

Guess you don't know much about the history of science either...Seems you don't know much about anything..which might explain why you have to get an opinion given to you. Scientists are supposed to be natural skeptics..hell, even today, there is a raging debate over what causes gravity. Very little can bring a bunch of natural skeptics into agreement...at the top of the list is money...governments have a great deal of it to pass around to those who support the narrative.

Like I said, if you actually grasped any of the science, you would have your doubts about the "crisis"...but apparently you are so uneducated, that you believe even easy science like that concerning ozone is beyond your reach...to bad...

And whenever someone talks about "vast conspiracies" then I just can't take them fucking seriously.

Guess history isn't your thing either...You think conspiracies don't exist? You don't think multiple tens of trillions of dollars could fuel one? You are more naive than I first thought.

Let me know if you wan't to try and get a handle on the very basic science of ozone...who knows, a bit of actual knowledge might alter your world view.

 

[JoeB131]

Guess you didn't read through the thread..

No, I really don't waste time on denier talking points. But I will happily validate to the Koch Brothers that you gave it your bet shot.

Guess history isn't your thing either...You think conspiracies don't exist? You don't think multiple tens of trillions of dollars could fuel one? You are more naive than I first thought.

Oh, no. There are no "conspiracies', there are rich guys like the Koch brothers who figured out they can fund bullshit skeptics to keep government from acting for our survival. So pretending that that Ozone crisis wasn't a thing was part of that.

 

[Crick]

Guess you didn't read through the thread..

No, I really don't waste time on denier talking points. But I will happily validate to the Koch Brothers that you gave it your bet shot.

Guess history isn't your thing either...You think conspiracies don't exist? You don't think multiple tens of trillions of dollars could fuel one? You are more naive than I first thought.

Oh, no. There are no "conspiracies', there are rich guys like the Koch brothers who figured out they can fund bullshit skeptics to keep government from acting for our survival. So pretending that that Ozone crisis wasn't a thing was part of that.

I am always astounded at the folks that think that every single scientist on the planet has chosen to put their careers if not risk jail time in order to obtain research funding, none of which will go into their own pockets WHILE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE MOTIVATION THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY HAS TO COUNTER CONCERNS ABOUT AGW.

 

[SSDD]

Guess you didn't read through the thread..

No, I really don't waste time on denier talking points. But I will happily validate to the Koch Brothers that you gave it your bet shot.

So speaks ignorance. Can't help you if you aren't willing to learn.

Oh, no. There are no "conspiracies', there are rich guys like the Koch brothers who figured out they can fund bullshit skeptics to keep government from acting for our survival. So pretending that that Ozone crisis wasn't a thing was part of that.

So you don't think that it is possible for a large corporation to buy politicians who then act in the interest of the corporation? You accused me of blurting out talking points, but thus far, you are the only one blurting out talking points...Unwilling to discuss the reality of ozone. Typical of liberals to accuse others of precisely what they are doing. Gobbels was particularly good at that particular tactic.

 

[SSDD]

Guess you didn't read through the thread..

No, I really don't waste time on denier talking points. But I will happily validate to the Koch Brothers that you gave it your bet shot.

Guess history isn't your thing either...You think conspiracies don't exist? You don't think multiple tens of trillions of dollars could fuel one? You are more naive than I first thought.

Oh, no. There are no "conspiracies', there are rich guys like the Koch brothers who figured out they can fund bullshit skeptics to keep government from acting for our survival. So pretending that that Ozone crisis wasn't a thing was part of that.

I am always astounded at the folks that think that every single scientist on the planet has chosen to put their careers if not risk jail time in order to obtain research funding, none of which will go into their own pockets WHILE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE MOTIVATION THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY HAS TO COUNTER CONCERNS ABOUT AGW.

You had your ass handed to you on the topic of ozone...you have been given a plethora of facts about ozone that call the whole "crisis" into question and still you choose to believe in the purity of government funded scientists. How blind is that skidmark?

And if you were any sort of student of history, you would know that people are always willing to put their careers at risk, and take a chance at jail time in order to aquire money, power, notoriety, and the admiration of their peers. Compare the resources of government to the resources of the evil oil companies...oil is mom and pop when compared to the resources of government...

And in case you didn't notice, oil is making plenty of money off of climate change...

 

[mamooth]

Use your brain just a bit hairball...If incoming UV from the sun is required to maintain the ozone in the upper atmosphere...and the half life of an ozone molecule in ideal conditions at room temperature is a day,

See if you can figure out the obvious flaw in your argument from that sentence. Go on, give it a try.

...

...

...

No? I'll have give you a hint. What's the temperature in the stratosphere? Is it warmer or colder than room temperature?

Why yes, it's very much colder.

Ozone at the top of the stratosphere, where it's warmer, does have a short half life. Ozone at the bottom of the stratosphere, where it's frigid, lasts for months.

https://www.epj-conferences.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2009/01/epjconf1010.pdf
---
From 40km to the stratopause, the ozone photochemical lifetime (which is defined as the «average» time a molecule exists before being destroyed by photochemical processes) is short, from a few hours to a day. In those conditions, transport processes can be neglected because they operate on much longer timescales in the stratosphere. Ozone is then in photochemical equilibrium and its concentration is determined by the ratio between its photochemical production and destruction. In contrast, in the lower stratosphere, between the tropopause and about 30km altitude, the ozone photochemical lifetime is long, from a few days to several months.
---

And that's why, contrary to your crazy claims, the ozone layer does not vanish every night. Good night, thanks for playing.

 

[JoeB131]

So speaks ignorance. Can't help you if you aren't willing to learn.

No, I'm just not too keen on being lied to by rich people. At least if they aren't paying me... I mean, I expect to be lied to when I'm at work by rich people... that's part of the job.

So you don't think that it is possible for a large corporation to buy politicians who then act in the interest of the corporation?

Politicians all over the world of all political stripes, and the scientists who study this thing, all of them? Um.. no. They could just as easily spend the money on process improvement to make their new coolant better and cheaper. Especially since DuPont ALREADY OWNED the trademark on Freon, which was replaced.

So why they were running the evil conspiracy to get every scientist and politician in the fucking world to exaggerate the effect of a known chemical reaction, and spending what was possibly BILLIONS of dollars to buy all these people off, they ran the risk that a competitor might just create a better version that was cheaper and beat them to market.

Nobody is more critical of Corporatism and Capitalism than I am, but this shit don't make no sense...

So what happened was that Scientists identified a problem. Politicians put political differences aside to address the problem with the Montreal protocol, and numerous corporations developed product to meet that requirement. CFC's were taken off the market and natural processes fixed the problem.

THIS IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK, DUMMY!!!

What's fucked up is the approach to Global Warming. Scientists identify a problem. Numerous Corporations start spreading absolute BULLSHIT to influence the minds of people to dumb to understand science and pay off the politicians to NOT address the problem.

THAT IS THE SYSTEM FAILING BADLY!!!


Happy to have cleared that up for you.

 

[SSDD]

And that's why, contrary to your crazy claims, the ozone layer does not vanish every night. Good night, thanks for playing.

This is a perfect example of why you will dammed near always be wrong hairball...like the rest of you warming cultists...you read looking for something that seems to agree with you and you stop at that point. You don't read to actually learn something and get the facts..

Did you note that in your paper, figure 11, the author claims absolute certainty of the amount of ozone in the stratosphere from 1983 back to 1964 and then has ever increasing uncertainty ranges up to 2002? You actually trust a model based on that sort of data? Also, I don't guess you noticed that the basis of the author's thesis is the Chapman atmosphere which provides estimates of the total ozone that are much too high in the tropics and much to low in the polar regions.

The Center for Coastal Physical Oceanography tells a somewhat different story about ozone and its lifetime in the stratosphere...as do numerous teaching texts found at various universities.

Stratosphere Troposphere Interactions: An Introduction
By K. Mohanakumar

Chapter 5 Section 3

Similarly, O atoms have even shorter lifetimes than ozone. Although they are around for only a fraction of a second, they are constantly being formed by photolysis of O2(slow) and O3 (fast). In our simple Chapman atmosphere, the destruction of O3 results in the creation of an O atom, while the loss of the O atom involves the creation of O3. Hence, the combined number of O and O3 (i.e., odd oxygen) molecules changes very slowly, since they are constantly being swapped. Recalling our definition of odd oxygen, Ox, we have in terms of amounts,

[Ox] = [O] + [O3]
While Ox is useful conceptually, at most stratospheric altitudes the O+O2 reaction is so fast that the [O] concentrations are very small (less than 1 percent of the total odd oxygen), and we can approximate [OX] with [O3].

The overall lifetime of Ox (either as ozone or free oxygen atom) can be computed from our Chapman chemistry. OX has a lifetime of 2 months at about 32 km in the northern middle latitudes during spring. The lifetime of free oxygen at the same altitude is about 4/100ths of a second, while O3 has a lifetime of about 3100 seconds (nearly an hour). At 20 km, the lifetime of O3 is about 4200 seconds, while the lifetime of O is about 1/1000 of a second. This is schematically illustrated in Figure 5.05, which shows the slow steady production of ozone on the left of the figure, and the rapid exchange between O and O3 or the right hand side of the figure.

Isotope Effects in Visible Light Photolysis and Chemical Destruction of Ozone by
Marion Früchtl states:

The most efficient catalysts (X) in the upper stratosphere are nitric oxide (NO), chlorine(Cl), hydrogen (H) and the hydroxyl radial (OH).

Nitrogen is present in the stratosphere at about 780,000ppm CFC's according to the skid mark's source are present at about 3.1 PARTS PER BILLION..CFC;s are not and never have been a problem in the ozone layer. Simply look at the life span of an O atom before it becomes part of either an O2 or an O3 molecule.

The facts of ozone production and life span simply don't support the alarmist narrative. It is funny though that Dupont hijacked all of you and your feel good mentality in order to sell a more expensive, less effective refrigerant and make billions in the process...in that I heartily congratulate their marketing department and also congratulate all those who purchased Dupont stock prior to the ozone scam.

 

[SSDD]

No, I'm just not too keen on being lied to by rich people. At least if they aren't paying me... I mean, I expect to be lied to when I'm at work by rich people... that's part of the job.

And yet, you are being led by people being funded by the richest and most powerful people in the world....

Politicians all over the world of all political stripes, and the scientists who study this thing, all of them? Um.. no. They could just as easily spend the money on process improvement to make their new coolant better and cheaper. Especially since DuPont ALREADY OWNED the trademark on Freon, which was replaced.

Alas, it isn't all of them...as evidenced by the scientific materials I have provided.

Freon which was cheap and you are selling it by the truckload...but you have a product which is expensive but you can't sell...what might a good marketing department suggest should happen to the cheap product which would then allow you to sell just as much of the new, more expensive product?

If you can't figure that one out, it is little wonder that you are just a dupe.

So what happened was that Scientists identified a problem.

Actually, that isn't what happened at all. The scientists who "discovered" the ozone hole went there, in fact, simply to prove that it exists. The theory was that less sunlight at the pole during the winter would result in less ozone. Their theory was proven..they intended to then go to the north pole to observe the same thing. Politicians fabricated a crisis...the scientists who discovered the hole saw no problem...they were just identifying a natural phenomenon that had been there, unnoticed all the time.

You are a tool...a dupe...a useful idiot who is so uneducated that he believes that science is out of the reach of everyone but people who have scientist on a diploma. You couldn't be more wrong. The fact is that just as much science is done by "citizen scientists" as those educated in a particular discipline. Unfortunate that you think that way...it makes you and people like you a perfect target for the elites of the world who are perfectly willing to use you for fun and profit.

to have cleared that up for you.

Wasn't necessary...people like you are so easy to see through that it is just pitiful.

 

[JoeB131]

And yet, you are being led by people being funded by the richest and most powerful people in the world....

I'd be all for electing regular folks to office... but it's kind of expensive.

Alas, it isn't all of them...as evidenced by the scientific materials I have provided.

Yup, you'll always find a flat earther out there somewhere...

Freon which was cheap and you are selling it by the truckload...but you have a product which is expensive but you can't sell...what might a good marketing department suggest should happen to the cheap product which would then allow you to sell just as much of the new, more expensive product?

If you can't figure that one out, it is little wonder that you are just a dupe.

Guy, I've worked in manufacturing for decades... You can always find a way to make it better and cheaper...

Actually, that isn't what happened at all. The scientists who "discovered" the ozone hole went there, in fact, simply to prove that it exists. The theory was that less sunlight at the pole during the winter would result in less ozone. Their theory was proven..they intended to then go to the north pole to observe the same thing. Politicians fabricated a crisis...the scientists who discovered the hole saw no problem...they were just identifying a natural phenomenon that had been there, unnoticed all the time.

Um, no, that's exactly what happened.

Ozone depletion - Wikipedia

Ozone depletion and the ozone hole have generated worldwide concern over increased cancer risks and other negative effects. The ozone layer prevents most harmful UVBwavelengths of ultraviolet light (UV light) from passing through the Earth's atmosphere. These wavelengths cause skin cancer, sunburn and cataracts, which were projected to increase dramatically as a result of thinning ozone, as well as harming plants and animals. These concerns led to the adoption of the Montreal Protocol in 1987, which bans the production of CFCs, halons and other ozone-depleting chemicals.

The ban came into effect in 1989. Ozone levels stabilized by the mid-1990s and began to recover in the 2000s. Recovery is projected to continue over the next century, and the ozone hole is expected to reach pre-1980 levels by around 2075.[4] The Montreal Protocol is considered the most successful international environmental agreement to date.

Oh, my God, absolutely horrifying... we did it right!

 

[JoeB131]

You are a tool...a dupe...a useful idiot who is so uneducated that he believes that science is out of the reach of everyone but people who have scientist on a diploma. You couldn't be more wrong. The fact is that just as much science is done by "citizen scientists" as those educated in a particular discipline. Unfortunate that you think that way...it makes you and people like you a perfect target for the elites of the world who are perfectly willing to use you for fun and profit.

Hey, tell you what, next time you get cancer, i think you should go to a "Citizen" Doctor, who didn't bother getting an MD. I'm sure she's done enough doctoring...

 

[SSDD]

Yup, you'll always find a flat earther out there somewhere...

As I have pointed out, in so far as the production, and life span of an ozone molecule goes, even those promoting the crisis agree with me...unfortunately, so few people like you have any critical thinking skills at all, you are susceptible to the scam. Unfortunate, but true.

Guy, I've worked in manufacturing for decades... You can always find a way to make it better and cheaper...

Guess you aren't very good at it...making it worse and more expensive is more profitable...especially if you find a way to eliminate the cheaper, better product from the market.

Um, no, that's exactly what happened.

Your propaganda says nothing about the team that went down to antarctica to prove the hole exists. So you have the propaganda, but none of the truth.

Ozone depletion and the ozone hole have generated worldwide concern over increased cancer risks and other negative effects.....

Again...failure of critical thinking skills.....the hole only exists at the poles, and the hole at the north pole is so small as to be insignificant. The hole at the south pole is larger, but only exists during the darkness of winter. After all, if there were enough UV entering the atmosphere, there would be no hole.

Aside from that...the sun is forever and always north of the ozone hole over antarctica...who exactly are the harmful UV rays falling upon? Any populated area is north of the hole and south of the sun...by what magic does the UV enter the hole from the north, and then shine upon land masses to the north of the hole?

Use your brain.

The ban came into effect in 1989. Ozone levels stabilized by the mid-1990s and began to recover in the 2000s.

Stabilized, based on what? We have no actual history and therefore have no idea whether what we are seeing is completely natural or not. The facts of the formation of O3 and the sheer insignificance of the amount of CFC's in the stratosphere....3.1 PARTS PER BILLION simply do not support the alarmist narrative.

Since ozone production does not happen when the sun is not shining on the atmosphere...and an ozone molecule in the stratosphere survives for between 1000 and 4200 seconds, how much ozone do you suppose is left on the dark side of the earth half an hour or so before the first UV radiation of the morning hits the stratosphere. Do you have enough education to figure out how long in minutes 1000 and 4200 seconds are? If not, I will help you out.

 

[JoeB131]

Guess you aren't very good at it...making it worse and more expensive is more profitable...especially if you find a way to eliminate the cheaper, better product from the market.

well, if the cheaper product is going to KILL US ALL, then it's not better.

As I have pointed out, in so far as the production, and life span of an ozone molecule goes, even those promoting the crisis agree with me...

.
Again, i'll take the word of real scientists over some guy who plays one on the internets..

 

[Wuwei]

You won't admit your most egregious errors, let alone your more subtle ones. Science based!

And you apparently aren't able to discuss the topic at all. How unsurprising is that?

• Ozone forms as a result of incoming UV breaking O2 molecules into O atoms...some of which form O3 molecules
• The Life span of an O molecule at 20km is about 0.002 seconds and at 32 km, it is about 0.04 seconds...those O atoms become O2 again, or O3 in small fractions of a second.
• When there is no incoming UV, there is no ozone formation
• The life span of an O3 molecule at 20km is about 1000 seconds
• The life span of an O3 molecule at 32km is about 4200 seconds
• I repeat, when there is no incoming UV, there is no production of O3

Now...use your brain for just a minute if you are able. If there is no production of O3 when there is no incoming UV and if the lifespan of an O3 molecule in the stratosphere, depending on altitude is somewhere between 1000 and 4200 seconds, How much O3 do you think is left in the atmosphere on the dark side of earth....say 20 minutes before the first UV of the day hits the atmosphere and O3 production begins again?

Now...how does that relate to the "ozone holes" over the polar regions during their respective winters?

You are wrong in your model of ozone distribution.

These four points you give seem that you are implying that the ozone quickly disappears after 17 to 70 minutes after night fall.

• When there is no incoming UV, there is no ozone formation
• The life span of an O3 molecule at 20km is about 1000 seconds
• The life span of an O3 molecule at 32km is about 4200 seconds
• I repeat, when there is no incoming UV, there is no production of O3

Look at either of the two videos at this NASA site. Blow it up to full screen so you can see the legend to the right better.
Hyperwall: Ozone Minimum Concentrations, 1979-2017
You will notice that away from the poles, the ozone is around 300 to 400 Dobson units at lower latitudes. Towards the equator it drops to 275 units, mostly likely because of Lambert's cosine law for steep angles.

If your four points are correct, half of the hemisphere should be colored black (zero). It is not. If you are trying to model the ozone distribution, you failed. We should rely on the observed, repeatable, measured data of the NASA videos, not your estimate.