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

[SSDD]

You haven't the math skills to criticize a kindergartener.

And there's also the wee point that apparently neither of you know the difference between a reactant and a catalyst.

You are nothing if not predictable skid mark...and anyone can predict that you will be all stupid all the time. Let me tell you a little story about chemistry and sunlight..it involves UV, and oxygen and nitrogen. Energetic UV, as I suppose you know, breaks apart O2 molecules...it also breaks apart N2 molecules...some of these free O and N atoms become NO or nitric oxide. NO is one of the three most abundant nitrogen oxides in the atmosphere.

What you clearly didn't know is that NO is a catalyst in the breakdown of O3. Nitric oxide exists in the stratosphere at something between 1ppm and 3ppm..

So you have a naturally occurring catalyst at 2 to 3 ppm and your CFC's at 3 parts per billion...

Still waiting for you to describe how an ozone layer crisis is possible...the natural destroyers of O3 molecules so completely overwhelm any damage done by CFC's that the damage done by CFC's is insignificant...

 

[Wuwei]

This is from Ozone Chapter 8.

Ozone in the lower atmosphere (i.e. the troposphere and lower stratosphere,..) has a long lifetime, on the order of months to years.

Note that the typical daily variations are 10-20 Dobson Units or about 5%. The largest changes up or down from one day to the next are about 50 DU or 15%.

You keep talking about the lower ozone layer.. We aren't discussing the ozone on the border of the stratosphere and troposphere...we are talking about the ozone which exists up in the high stratosphere...

The air in the high stratosphere is at only 5 mbar. Not much ozone nor anything else compared to the lower stratosphere.
Besides that there is no diurnal variation in the stratosphere. This is from the source I cited.

4.1 Short-Term Variability in the Upper Stratosphere
......

While ozone is produced and destroyed on a time scale of one day or less at altitudes greater than 40 km altitude, this does not in itself lead to a diurnal variation of ozone. This is because when sunlight is present, production and loss are balanced (as given by the steady state approximation in the upper stratosphere). When the sun sets, both production and loss are turned off and the ozone concentration increases slightly as O atoms are converted to ozone molecules in three body reactions involving O, O2, and M.​

It looks like your model of daily variation of ozone doesn't hold water. The ozone in the troposphere and lower atmosphere drops at most by 15% at night. And the ozone in the upper stratosphere increases slightly at night.

 

[SSDD]

This is from Ozone Chapter 8.

Ozone in the lower atmosphere (i.e. the troposphere and lower stratosphere,..) has a long lifetime, on the order of months to years.

Note that the typical daily variations are 10-20 Dobson Units or about 5%. The largest changes up or down from one day to the next are about 50 DU or 15%.

You keep talking about the lower ozone layer.. We aren't discussing the ozone on the border of the stratosphere and troposphere...we are talking about the ozone which exists up in the high stratosphere...

The air in the high stratosphere is at only 5 mbar. Not much ozone nor anything else compared to the lower stratosphere.
Besides that there is no diurnal variation in the stratosphere. This is from the source I cited.

4.1 Short-Term Variability in the Upper Stratosphere
......

While ozone is produced and destroyed on a time scale of one day or less at altitudes greater than 40 km altitude, this does not in itself lead to a diurnal variation of ozone. This is because when sunlight is present, production and loss are balanced (as given by the steady state approximation in the upper stratosphere). When the sun sets, both production and loss are turned off and the ozone concentration increases slightly as O atoms are converted to ozone molecules in three body reactions involving O, O2, and M.​

It looks like your model of daily variation of ozone doesn't hold water. The ozone in the troposphere and lower atmosphere drops at most by 15% at night. And the ozone in the upper stratosphere increases slightly at night.

I guess your source believes that the reactions between O3, nitrogen, hydrogen, natural chlorine and bromine molecules, and yes, even what few CFC's there are all stop at night, or during the arctic winter.

The things you will believe if someone just prints it for you and it seems to agree with what you believe.

I am still waiting for one of you wackos to tell me how you think CFC's at a concentration of 3 parts per BILLION, are a threat to the ozone layer when O3 readily reacts with nitrogen, hydrogen, natural chlorine and bromine molecules which together amount to something over 780,000 parts per MILLION.. The skid mark thought that it was because CFC's are a catalyst, but NO is also a catalyst and exists in the stratosphere at something between 1 and 3 parts per million as opposed to CFC's which are 3 parts per billion...

So lets hear it. How are CFC's a threat to the ozone layer?

 

[Wuwei]

This is from Ozone Chapter 8.

Ozone in the lower atmosphere (i.e. the troposphere and lower stratosphere,..) has a long lifetime, on the order of months to years.

Note that the typical daily variations are 10-20 Dobson Units or about 5%. The largest changes up or down from one day to the next are about 50 DU or 15%.

You keep talking about the lower ozone layer.. We aren't discussing the ozone on the border of the stratosphere and troposphere...we are talking about the ozone which exists up in the high stratosphere...

The air in the high stratosphere is at only 5 mbar. Not much ozone nor anything else compared to the lower stratosphere.
Besides that there is no diurnal variation in the stratosphere. This is from the source I cited.

4.1 Short-Term Variability in the Upper Stratosphere
......

While ozone is produced and destroyed on a time scale of one day or less at altitudes greater than 40 km altitude, this does not in itself lead to a diurnal variation of ozone. This is because when sunlight is present, production and loss are balanced (as given by the steady state approximation in the upper stratosphere). When the sun sets, both production and loss are turned off and the ozone concentration increases slightly as O atoms are converted to ozone molecules in three body reactions involving O, O2, and M.​

It looks like your model of daily variation of ozone doesn't hold water. The ozone in the troposphere and lower atmosphere drops at most by 15% at night. And the ozone in the upper stratosphere increases slightly at night.

I guess your source believes that the reactions between O3, nitrogen, hydrogen, natural chlorine and bromine molecules, and yes, even what few CFC's there are all stop at night, or during the arctic winter.

The things you will believe if someone just prints it for you and it seems to agree with what you believe.

I am still waiting for one of you wackos to tell me how you think CFC's at a concentration of 3 parts per BILLION, are a threat to the ozone layer when O3 readily reacts with nitrogen, hydrogen, natural chlorine and bromine molecules which together amount to something over 780,000 parts per MILLION.. The skid mark thought that it was because CFC's are a catalyst, but NO is also a catalyst and exists in the stratosphere at something between 1 and 3 parts per million as opposed to CFC's which are 3 parts per billion...

So lets hear it. How are CFC's a threat to the ozone layer?

Read the article yourself, I'm not going to do your research. You always disparaged models by physics experts, but yet you build your own.model, and you are far from understanding physics. You challenged the author. Write him an email.

 

[Wuwei]

You challenged the author. Write him an email.

Actually, I have an idea. I think I will start copy/pasting these fools' talking points and emailing them to the experts myself. Then we can all laugh at the responses.

SSDD actually did that. He contacted a Prof Raeder, at MIT if I remember correctly. SSDD's questions were bland, so SSDD interpreted Raeder's reply to be verification of one way energy flow. Tod contacted the same professor and, well it's a long story. I forgot which thread it's on, but it was absolutely hilarious.

 

[Wuwei]

I did a search and found this as SSDD's question to Prof Raeder,
The Heart of the AGW Premise Fails Empirical Review.

This is Todd's letter to the same professor:
The Heart of the AGW Premise Fails Empirical Review.

There is more follow-on correspondence between the professor and both SSDD and Todd. SSDD really shot himself in the foot.

 

[Sunsettommy]

ELSEVIER

The Antarctic ozone depletion caused by Erebus volcano gas emissions

V.V.ZuevabcN.E.ZuevaaE.S.SavelievaaV.V.Gerasimovab

2015

Abstract
Heterogeneous chemical reactions releasing photochemically active molecular chlorine play a key role in Antarctic stratospheric ozone destruction, resulting in the Antarctic ozone hole. Hydrogen chloride (HCl) is one of the principal components in these reactions on the surfaces of polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs). PSCs form during polar nights at extremely low temperatures (lower than −78 °C) mainly on sulfuric acid (H2SO4) aerosols, acting as condensation nuclei and formed from sulfur dioxide (SO2). However, the cause of HCl and H2SO4 high concentrations in the Antarctic stratosphere, leading to considerable springtime ozone depletion, is still not clear. Based on the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data over the last 35 years and by using the NOAA HYSPLIT trajectory model, we show that Erebus volcano gas emissions (including HCl and SO2) can reach the Antarctic stratosphere via high-latitude cyclones with the annual average probability P¯ann.'>P¯ann. of at least ∼0.235 (23.5%). Depending on Erebus activity, this corresponds to additional annual stratospheric HCl mass of 1.0–14.3 kilotons (kt) and SO2 mass of 1.4–19.7 kt. Thus, Erebus volcano is the natural and powerful source of additional stratospheric HCl and SO2, and hence, the cause of the Antarctic ozone depletion, together with man-made chlorofluorocarbons.

 

[Crick]

From your post: "... together with man-made chlorofluorocarbons."

 

[bripat9643]

Frightening the populous is as old as dirt....governments have been doing this for power and control since the beginning of time...the difference this time is it was pushed into the young minds via public schools...so supposed educated people have sucked it up and believe it....

Politics under democracy consists almost wholly of the discovery, chase, and scotching of bugaboos. The statesman becomes, in the last analysis, a mere witch-hunter, a glorified smeller and snooper, eternally chanting "Fe, Fi, Fo, Fum!" It has been so in the United States since the earliest days. The whole history of the country has been a history of melodramatic pursuits of horrendous monsters, most of them imaginary: the red-coats, the Hessians, the monocrats, again the red-coats, the Bank, the Catholics, Simon Legree, the Slave Power, Jeff Davis, Mormonism, Wall Street, the rum demon, John Bull, the hell hounds of plutocracy, the trusts, General Weyler, Pancho Villa, German spies, hyphenates, the Kaiser, Bolshevism. The list might be lengthened indefinitely; a complete chronicle of the Republic could be written in terms of it, and without omitting a single important episode.

It was long ago observed that the plain people, under democracy, never vote for anything, but always against something. The fact explains in large measure, the tendency of democratic states to pass over statesmen of genuine imagination and sound ability in favour of colorless mediocrities. The former are shining marks, and so it is easy for demagogues to bring them down; the latter are preferred because it is impossible to fear them.

- H. L. Mencken -

 

[bripat9643]

The Montreal Protocol worked and that is what truly scares the bejeesus out of conservatives. The Protocol which has been very successful reduced ozone emissions which led to the recovery of the ozone layer. The reason it scares conservatives is because it is a precursor of a frame work that can work to fight climate change.

Given how anti-science and anti-fact the conservative movement has become, the Montreal Protocol would never, or at least be nearly impossible, to implement today to our detriment. At least then there were still rational conservatives like George HW Bush.

I can't help but notice that you completely dodged the science...this tells that your position on the topic is political...were it scientific, toy would have used the scientific facts rather than a political narrative to defend your position.

With all due respect, the idea of revisiting the science on Chlorofluorocarbons is beyond ludicrous. There is no debate on it anymore except in the minds of anti-science and anti-fact conservatives. The protocol worked as the ozone layer is recovering.

In the American conservative movement today, apparently there are no facts, all science is false and everything is subjective. Gawd, what happened to conservatives is beyond me?

Of course there is debate. The idea that chlorofluorocarbons caused the so-called ozone hole. For one thing, they are 3-4 times denser than the gases in our atmosphere. How would chlorofluorocarbons sprayed from a can of hairspray get into the stratosphere? It strains credulity to believe such a thing is even possible.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

 

[bripat9643]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

Actually, this is the work of the global scientific community. Any one of you uneducated fools is invited to present an actual challenge to any of it at any time. No, crying your little eyes out and pulling on each other's Taffy on a message board is not an actual challenge to scientific knowledge.

A thread that claims the global scientific community has ganged up to lie to America's trailer park dwellers is an embarrassing conspiracy theory and should be treated as such.

 

[bripat9643]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

Actually, this is the work of the global scientific community. Any one of you uneducated fools is invited to present an actual challenge to any of it at any time. No, crying your little eyes out and pulling on each other's Taffy on a message board is not an actual challenge to scientific knowledge.

A thread that claims the global scientific community has ganged up to lie to America's trailer park dwellers is an embarrassing conspiracy theory and should be treated as such.

ROFL! By the "global scientific community" you mean all the shameless posers on the government payroll.

There Never Was a Hole in the Ozone Tim Ball Teaches You the Science - BRAINFEED.TV

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

Actually, this is the work of the global scientific community. Any one of you uneducated fools is invited to present an actual challenge to any of it at any time. No, crying your little eyes out and pulling on each other's Taffy on a message board is not an actual challenge to scientific knowledge.

A thread that claims the global scientific community has ganged up to lie to America's trailer park dwellers is an embarrassing conspiracy theory and should be treated as such.

ROFL! By the "global scientific community" you mean all the shameless posers on the government payroll.

There Never Was a Hole in the Ozone Tim Ball Teaches You the Science - BRAINFEED.TV

No, I meant the global scientific community. And no, I'm not going to click yet another one of your links you never watched or read and don't understand, then spoonfeed it back to you. I'm not your mommy.

 

[bripat9643]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

Actually, this is the work of the global scientific community. Any one of you uneducated fools is invited to present an actual challenge to any of it at any time. No, crying your little eyes out and pulling on each other's Taffy on a message board is not an actual challenge to scientific knowledge.

A thread that claims the global scientific community has ganged up to lie to America's trailer park dwellers is an embarrassing conspiracy theory and should be treated as such.

ROFL! By the "global scientific community" you mean all the shameless posers on the government payroll.

There Never Was a Hole in the Ozone Tim Ball Teaches You the Science - BRAINFEED.TV

No, I meant the global scientific community. And no, I'm not going to click yet another one of your links you never watched or read and don't understand, then spoonfeed it back to you. I'm not your mommy.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The fact that this thread was not immediately moved to the conspiracy theory section tells us a lot about the message board and its moderation.

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

Actually, this is the work of the global scientific community. Any one of you uneducated fools is invited to present an actual challenge to any of it at any time. No, crying your little eyes out and pulling on each other's Taffy on a message board is not an actual challenge to scientific knowledge.

A thread that claims the global scientific community has ganged up to lie to America's trailer park dwellers is an embarrassing conspiracy theory and should be treated as such.

ROFL! By the "global scientific community" you mean all the shameless posers on the government payroll.

There Never Was a Hole in the Ozone Tim Ball Teaches You the Science - BRAINFEED.TV

No, I meant the global scientific community. And no, I'm not going to click yet another one of your links you never watched or read and don't understand, then spoonfeed it back to you. I'm not your mommy.

Notice that warmists ignore the fact that the rest of the worlds ozone cover outside of the polar region hardly changed at all the whole time. I doubt they even know about the EXISTENCE of monitoring stations that measures Ozone on a daily basis.

 

[bripat9643]

It tells you that you leftwing morons can't bamboozle everyone.

Actually, this is the work of the global scientific community. Any one of you uneducated fools is invited to present an actual challenge to any of it at any time. No, crying your little eyes out and pulling on each other's Taffy on a message board is not an actual challenge to scientific knowledge.

A thread that claims the global scientific community has ganged up to lie to America's trailer park dwellers is an embarrassing conspiracy theory and should be treated as such.

ROFL! By the "global scientific community" you mean all the shameless posers on the government payroll.

There Never Was a Hole in the Ozone Tim Ball Teaches You the Science - BRAINFEED.TV

No, I meant the global scientific community. And no, I'm not going to click yet another one of your links you never watched or read and don't understand, then spoonfeed it back to you. I'm not your mommy.

Notice that warmists ignore the fact that the rest of the worlds ozone cover outside of the polar region hardly changed at all the whole time. I doubt they even know about the EXISTENCE of monitoring stations that measures Ozone on a daily basis.

These so-called "scientists" had no clue what the ozone layer looked like before they discovered this "hole." That was the first time they had measured it.

 

[Crick]

Patrick! Long time no see. How have you been? Where have you been? When have you been there? Still angry?

 

[mamooth]

Of course there is debate. The idea that chlorofluorocarbons caused the so-called ozone hole. For one thing, they are 3-4 times denser than the gases in our atmosphere.

So, by your very peculiar physics, all of the argon in the atmosphere must have sunk down and collected at the surface, because it's heavier than the other atmospheric gases.

However, since we all haven't suffocated due to the argon displacing all the oxygen, it would appear your version of reality is totally wrong. In the real world, there's this thing called "wind" which mixes gases most effectively.