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

[SSDD]

I think you should read the captioning under your graphic. I don't think you understand what you've actually posted here. No one is arguing that UV does NOT deplete ozone. The argument is that there were no changes in UV sufficient to have caused the observed depletion. The Montreal Protocol was in effect by the time of the data you have posted here and most of that data are radiation from CO2 and NO going outward - you know, the sort of thing you claim doesn't exist.

I understood it just fine...should have known that presenting you with a graph is about as useful as presenting a pig with a dollar bill.

You claimed that there were no changes in UV sufficient to cause O3 depletion...since UV is entirely responsible for O3 production in the stratosphere, any downward change is sufficient to cause less O3 to be produced.

And the red graphic is what you should be paying attention to skidmark...
Time series of daily solar EUV flux from 0.1 to 175 nm as measured by the Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics satellite Solar EUV Experiment (SEE) instrument (red).

As anyone who can actually read a graph would see...solar EUV flux in the wavelengths responsible for producing O3 are decreasing..and have been for some time...

 

[Crick]

Yet in the period of that data, ozone levels were increasing or remaining steady.

 

[SSDD]

Yet in the period of that data, ozone levels were increasing or remaining steady.

Look at your graph doofus...O3 was all over the map...

 

[Crick]

Here is what you need to find: UV levels increasing dramatically over this time period during which ozone was being depleted and holes were forming.

Since the Montreal Protocol went into effect, CFC levels in the atmosphere have fallen but only slightly

and ozone levels have steadied or climbed

 

[SSDD]

Here is what you need to find: UV levels increasing dramatically over this time period during which ozone was being depleted and holes were forming.

Ozone holes have always formed over the poles during their winters...it is nothing new and will continue so long as it is dark at the poles during the winter...

and ozone levels have steadied or climbed

Do a bit of reading outside your alarmist box...scientists are "puzzled" because the ozone layer is not healing as expected..ozone depletion continues...and surprise surprise...the depletion is following along with the sun going quiet...watch ozone continue to drop as the sun remains quiet.

The Montreal protocol was approved in 87....a time in which the sun was moving towards its most active period in hundreds of years....the late 20th century saw the most active sun in a very long time...and during that time, the montreal protocol was proclaimed a success...because more incoming UV from the sun was producing more O3...now the sun is going quite and O3 is diminishing...it doesn't take a rocket scientists...only enough critical thinking skills to realize that you were scammed by 3M and some bought and paid for politicians...

 

[Crick]

Do you actually think you are the only one aware of seasonal ozone variations? Your ego knows no bounds. Ozone holes were observed to INCREASE in size during the 50s, 60s and 70s. Unfortunately for you, UV did not increase during that time frame.

 

[jc456]

Do you actually think you are the only one aware of seasonal ozone variations? Your ego knows no bounds. Ozone holes were observed to INCREASE in size during the 50s, 60s and 70s. Unfortunately for you, UV did not increase during that time frame.

so you admit holes are there and not caused by cfc's even today! too fking funny.

 

[SSDD]

Do you actually think you are the only one aware of seasonal ozone variations? Your ego knows no bounds. Ozone holes were observed to INCREASE in size during the 50s, 60s and 70s. Unfortunately for you, UV did not increase during that time frame.

Got any hard data on UV and EUV in the specific wavelengths responsible for O3 formation from the 50's 60's and 70's? Didn't think so....just more fake facts pulled out of your ass... Who do you think you can fool with that sort of bullshit claim? They say that you can only make up lies that you believe would be good enough to fool you...that bar is set pretty damned low.

 

[Crick]

You are the one with the extraordinary claim. It is YOUR responsibility to produce data on UV levels that would make it a candidate for the observed ozone depletion. I have already posted several UV datasets covering that period and none of them show the appropriate characteristics. So, your turn Same Shit

 

[jc456]

You are the one with the extraordinary claim. It is YOUR responsibility to produce data on UV levels that would make it a candidate for the observed ozone depletion. I have already posted several UV datasets covering that period and none of them show the appropriate characteristics. So, your turn Same Shit

dude, he did. why are you so disingenuous?

 

[Crick]

You are the one with the extraordinary claim. It is YOUR responsibility to produce data on UV levels that would make it a candidate for the observed ozone depletion. I have already posted several UV datasets covering that period and none of them show the appropriate characteristics. So, your turn Same Shit

dude, he did. why are you so disingenuous?

No, he has not. I am not surprised you should think so. Within what post do you believe he did so?

 

[jc456]

You are the one with the extraordinary claim. It is YOUR responsibility to produce data on UV levels that would make it a candidate for the observed ozone depletion. I have already posted several UV datasets covering that period and none of them show the appropriate characteristics. So, your turn Same Shit

dude, he did. why are you so disingenuous?

No, he has not. I am not surprised you should think so. Within what post do you believe he did so?

Most all his exchanges with you and waweii

 

[Crick]

Sorry, no. The only UV data he has posted started well after the Montreal Protocol went into effect. He needs to show UV data that might be responsible for the growing Antarctic ozone hole. This he has not done. I posted up 3 or 4 such sets and none were increasing as would be required. See post #436 in this thread; came up on page 44 on my screen.

 

[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.


By the way..the montreal protocol was aimed at CFC emissions, not O3 emissions as you stated. The whole topic is clearly over yourr head so you are just voicing someone elses opinion and not an informed opinion of your own.

We’ve seen right wing science. Like magical creation. Hilarious!

How many genders are there, douchebag?

 

[Crick]

We are still waiting, at least two weeks since my first request, for Same Shit Different Day to produce UV data that correlates with the depletion of ozone first noted in 1985 by Farmer, Gardiner and Shanklin. Without such correlated data, his claim that UV changes are responsible for ozone changes is specious (false).

As to his oft repeated question how a small constituent catalyst like ozone can have such large effects:

Why does the ozone hole form over Antarctica ?

The answer is essentially 'because of the weather in the ozone layer'. In order for rapid ozone destruction to happen, clouds (known as PSCs, Stratospheric Clouds Mother of Pearl or Nacreous Clouds) have to form in the ozone layer. In these clouds surface chemistry takes place. This converts chlorine or bromine (from CFCs and other ozone depleting chemicals) into an active form, so that when there is sunlight, ozone is rapidly destroyed. Without the clouds, there is little or no ozone destruction. Only during the Antarctic winter does the atmosphere get cold enough for these clouds to form widely through the centre of the ozone layer. Elsewhere the atmosphere is just too warm and no clouds form. The northern and southern hemispheres have different 'weather' in the ozone layer, and the net result is that the temperature of the Arctic ozone layer during winter is normally some ten degrees warmer than that of the Antarctic. This means that such clouds are rare, but sometimes the 'weather' is colder than normal and they do form. Under these circumstances significant ozone depletion can take place over the Arctic, but it is usually for a much shorter period of time and covers a smaller area than in the Antarctic.
The Ozone Hole

 

[SSDD]

The wait continues, skidmark, for you to post up a single one of your alarmist articles or papers in which the natural causes of ozone depletion are seriously considered... Clearly that is never going to happen because what are the chances of getting funding for a study which would show the whole ozone crisis to have been a scam perpetrated by a large chemical company and a few bought and paid for politicians in order to sell a very expensive, less effective refrigerant?

 

[Crick]

The wait continues Shit, for you post up a single one of your non-existent scientific studies that concludes ozone depletion is the result of natural variation among natural causes.

 

[SSDD]

The wait continues Shit, for you post up a single one of your non-existent scientific studies that concludes ozone depletion is the result of natural variation among natural causes.

Sorry skidmark....you just keep getting more and more stupid....is it drugs?...early onset dementia?.....head injury?

I provided ample evidence of the wide swings in solar output of UV in the bands responsible for the formation of O3...I provided evidence of decreasing UV output...I provided evidence that the "holes" are seasonal...now you claim the wait continues for data from research that hasn't even been done?

That is the point skid mark...the research looking at the natural factors which have profound effects on the production of O3 has not been done...all the drivel you provided indicated that quite clearly...the natural factors were ignored and the publications simply assumed that a molecule present at 3 parts per billion was responsible...moron...The wait continues for some actual, serious research to be done....good luck to the people wanting to do that in this academic environment...research which could expose the scam...and the shoddiness of the pseudoscience which came before...

 

[Crick]

No one is ignoring factors. You had no problem assembling the data with which to make your bullshit claims. You didn't produce that on your own. It has been shown here repeatedly that none of the natural ozone breakdown factors changed levels in a manner that might account for the increased ozone depletion. You've been told this before yet you carry on.

That makes you a fucking TROLL. Fuck off TROLL

 

[jc456]

No one is ignoring factors. You had no problem assembling the data with which to make your bullshit claims. You didn't produce that on your own. It has been shown here repeatedly that none of the natural ozone breakdown factors changed levels in a manner that might account for the increased ozone depletion. You've been told this before yet you carry on.

That makes you a fucking TROLL. Fuck off TROLL

yo crckster, did you ever answer this from SSDD?

"How many times have I challenged you to provide a rational, scientific explanation for how a molecule present at 3 parts per BILLION might represent a greater threat to the ozone layer than the natural catalysts present at 1 to 4 parts per million, and the natural reactants present at 780,000 parts per million?"