Originally posted by S_W_LeGenDRight. No. The fact that the ozone hole didn't turn out to be a disaster isn't grounds for being complacent about climate change. In fact it's the opposite given as your article states:
Sure.The "ozone hole" puzzle is almost solved.
Global warming is next. Some scientists are already skeptical.
Interesting studies:
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/28/11101.full.pdf
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v391/n6663/full/391141a0.html
http://www.ces.fau.edu/nasa/module-4/causes-2.php
Each year during ozone hole season, scientists from around the world track the depletion of the ozone above Antarctica using balloons, satellites and computer models. They have found that the ozone hole is actually getting smaller: Scientists estimate that if the Montreal Protocol had never been implemented, the hole would have grown by 40 percent by 2013. Instead, the hole is expected to completely heal by 2050.So thank god we took action, eh?
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenDCan you summarise what these studies are supposed to prove, pally?
Another: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/07/revisiting-the-younger-dryas/
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Right. No. The fact that the ozone hole didn't turn out to be a disaster isn't grounds for being complacent about climate change. In fact it's the opposite given as your article states😖o thank god we took action, eh?
That was model-based projection. And models can be wrong.
Ozone hole expands during Summer season and shortens during Winter season - it is a natural phenomenon. Comprehension problems?
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenDNone at all mate. In particular, I understand that this is not mutually exclusive with the existence of ozone depleting substances.
🙄That was model-based projection. And models can be wrong.
Ozone hole expands during Summer season and shortens during Winter season - it is a natural phenomenon. Comprehension problems?
The only thing I'm struggling to comprehend is why you can't work this out, when the article you linked explains it plainly. 😬
Originally posted by Beniboybling
None at all mate. In particular, I understand that this is not mutually exclusive with the existence of ozone depleting substances.The only thing I'm struggling to comprehend is why you can't work this out, when the article you linked explains it plainly. 😬
Let us reexamine this para:
These days, scientists understand a lot more about the ozone hole. They know that it’s a seasonal phenomenon that forms during Antarctica’s spring, when weather heats up and reactions between CFCs and ozone increase. As weather cools during Antarctic winter, the hole gradually recovers until next year. And the Antarctic ozone hole isn’t alone. A “mini-hole” was spotted over Tibet in 2003, and in 2005 scientists confirmed thinning over the Arctic so drastic it could be considered a hole.
Each year during ozone hole season, scientists from around the world track the depletion of the ozone above Antarctica using balloons, satellites and computer models. They have found that the ozone hole is actually getting smaller: Scientists estimate that if the Montreal Protocol had never been implemented, the hole would have grown by 40 percent by 2013. Instead, the hole is expected to completely heal by 2050.
Since the hole opens and closes and is subject to annual variances, air flow patterns and other atmospheric dynamics, it can be hard to keep in the public consciousness.
Bryan Johnson is a research chemist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who helps monitor the ozone hole from year to year. He says public concern about the environment has shifted away from the hole to the ways in which carbon dioxide affects the environment. “There are three phases to atmospheric concerns,” he says. “First there was acid rain. Then it was the ozone hole. Now it’s greenhouse gases like CO2.”
The article is neutral in its message but contains an important revelation in regards to Ozone Hole story that I wanted to bring to your attention - Ozone Holes are natural occurrences and not man-made constructs.
Appropriate explanation here: https://knowledgedrift.wordpress.com/2010/05/22/ozone-the-hole-that-always-was/
Caption for the dummies:
I’ve explained the Ozone layer so many times on other people’s blogs that I finally decided to write it up on my own blog so I could just point at it. There’s an assumption that people make that the famous Ozone holes are man made. While some pollutants can in fact destroy Ozone, the holes themselves are in fact natural.
Montreal Protocol turned out to be a feel-good political exercise in the end - it does not prevents Ozone holes from forming and healing and forming and healing - now understood to be a natural phenomenon and pattern.
No harm in adopting eco-friendly practices but you cannot fool the masses into believing that climatic and environmental shifts are man-made constructs in large part - for long.
Your comprehension problems continue to baffle.No, like I said I understand it fine. Ozone holes are a natural phenomena yes, but they are still effected by ozone depleting substances like CFCs. Neither sources you've cited deny that, in fact both support it explictly. Therefore the Montreal Protocol was not just a feel-good exercise, but a valid effort to protect the environment that could see the ozone hole heal completely, as opposed to expand by 40%. 😬
None of this doing anything to justify complacency on the climate change issue, which again the article you cited, warns against.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
No, like I said I understand it fine. Ozone holes are a natural phenomena yes, but they are still effected by ozone depleting substances like CFCs. Neither sources you've cited deny that, in fact both support it explictly. Therefore the Montreal Protocol was not just a feel-good exercise, but a valid effort to protect the environment that could see the ozone hole heal completely, as opposed to expand by 40%. 😬None of this doing anything to justify complacency on the climate change issue, which again the article you cited, warns against.
So is the Ozone hole a complete hoax? Pollutants like CFC’s could make the holes larger in theory, but the fact is that the holes are natural in the first place, and they fluctuate daily as the earth spins, seasonally as the earth’s inclination to the sun changes, annually as the earth’s orbit takes it closer and farther away from the sun, and from fluctuations in the sun’s output of UV in the first place.
Source: https://knowledgedrift.wordpress.com/2010/05/22/ozone-the-hole-that-always-was/
😉
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Right, so no contradiction. Are we done now?
If you think Montreal Protocol can prevent Ozone Holes from re-emerging - you are wrong.
Ozone Holes form and heal (naturally) subject to natural causes - CFC in the picture or not. There is no established correlation in this regard.
No harm in being eco-friendly but you cannot be allowed to paint natural phenomenon as man-made constructs.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Uhuh, I've explained my position quite clearly LeG and it's supported by all the evidence you've provided. At this point, you're just arguing with yourself, while entirely detracting from the actual topic. 👆
Another year has passed and that stubborn Ozone Hole over Antarctica refuses to go away. Data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) shows that the Ozone Hole for the fall maximum season grew 22 percent from 2014 to 2015. World consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances has been reduced to zero over the last three decades, but the Ozone Hole is as large as ever. Did humans really save the ozone layer?
In 1974, Dr. Mario Molina and Dr. Sherwood Roland of the University of California published a paper asserting that chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) pollution from industry was destroying the ozone layer in Earth’s stratosphere. CFCs were gases used in hair spray, refrigerators, and insulating foams. The ozone layer is a layer of atmosphere located between 6 and 25 miles above the Earth’s surface.
The theory of Molina and Roland postulated that human-produced CFCs migrate upward through the atmosphere to the stratosphere, where ultraviolet radiation breaks down CFC molecules, releasing chlorine atoms. Chlorine then reacts as a catalyst to break down ozone molecules into oxygen, reducing the ozone concentration. The more CFCs used, the greater the destruction of the ozone layer, according to the theory.
In 1983, three researchers from the British Antarctic Survey discovered at thinning of the ozone layer over Antarctica, which became known as the Ozone Hole. Their observations appeared to confirm the theory of Molina and Roland. Molina and Roland were awarded a Noble Prize in chemistry in 1995 for their work.
The Ozone Layer is known to block ultraviolet rays, shielding the surface of Earth from high-energy radiation. Scientists were concerned that degradation of the ozone layer would increase rates of skin cancer and cataracts and cause immune system problems in humans. Former Vice President Al Gore’s 1992 book claimed that hunters reported finding blind rabbits in Patagonia and that fishermen were catching blind fish due to human destruction of the ozone layer, but this has not been confirmed.
In an effort to save the ozone layer, 29 nations and the European Community signed the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer in September of 1987. Over the next decade, the Protocol was universally signed by 197 nations, agreeing to ban the use of CFCs. Since 1986, world consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) is down more than 99 percent, effectively reaching zero by 2010.
The Montreal Protocol has been hailed as an international success in resolving a major environmental issue. The Protocol has been praised as an example to follow for elimination of greenhouse gas emissions in the fight to halt global warming. But despite the elimination of CFCs, the Ozone Hole remains as large as ever.
During September to October, just after the Antarctic winter, the Ozone Hole is the largest for each year. NASA recently reported that from September 7 through October 13, 2015, the Ozone Hole reached a mean area of 25.6 million kilometers, the largest area since 2006 and the fourth largest since measurements began in 1979. The hole remains large, despite the fact that world ODS consumption all but disappeared about a decade ago.
Scientists are mixed on when the stubborn Ozone Hole will disappear. NASA recently announced that the hole will be half-closed by 2020. Others forecast that it will not begin to disappear until 2040 or later. But the longer the hole persists, the greater the likelihood that the ozone layer is dominated by natural factors, not human CFC emissions.
Source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/26/did-we-really-save-the-ozone-layer/
&
Now its not like there is zero Ozone in that hole, there is some because there are Oxygen atoms left over from Ozone breaking down, and they can in fact form back into Oxygen molecules and then into Ozone if they get the right amount of UV (and don’t react with other things like Hydrogen and Methane). It would be more accurate to call it a “depression” than an actual hole. There is still “air” there, just not much Ozone in it. In the early spring the hole starts to grow as the polar region comes out of darkness and the Sun’s rays can start destroying Ozone. As summer progresses, the inclination to the sun becomes more direct, and the Sun’s rays start hitting the Oxygen layer, creating Ozone. The reason that the Ozone hole over the south pole is bigger is because earth’s orbit is elliptical which tends to amplify the destruction cycle in the southern hemisphere and diminish it in the northern hemisphere.
So, do people in far northern communities (or far south in the southern hemisphere) need to panic? In fact, the hole would have to get very big for that to be a problem. The UV rays we are exposed to, even at very high latitudes don’t pass through the Ozone hole to get to earth surface:
So is the Ozone hole a complete hoax? Pollutants like CFC’s could make the holes larger in theory, but the fact is that the holes are natural in the first place, and they fluctuate daily as the earth spins, seasonally as the earth’s inclination to the sun changes, annually as the earth’s orbit takes it closer and farther away from the sun, and from fluctuations in the sun’s output of UV in the first place.
Source: https://knowledgedrift.wordpress.co...hat-always-was/
Once again:
Why the correlation between Montreal Control and Ozone Depletion is not apparent in reality as predicted in two scientific studies?
Because "Ozone Holes" formulate and deplete due to [natural causes].
---
You need to get your head examined.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Right, I get that you have this bad habit of spamming the same shit over and over so I'm just gonna finish with an "OK bro".
Montreal Protocol might be a genuine effort to 'save the planet' in regards to Ozone Hole phenomenon but its formulation and depletion is natural as explained in this blog: https://knowledgedrift.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/ozone-below-the-hole.png.
- and observed in later years: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/26/did-we-really-save-the-ozone-layer/
Now, this doesn't imply that we stop being responsible but we cannot be stupid either.
We did not 'save the planet' with implementation of Montreal Protocol because we misunderstood a natural phenomenon in the first place.
Anybody with a functioning brain will get the idea by now. You on the other hand...
