Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If it is so elementary-level, why were all the global warming alarmists screaming about how ozone holes were going to kill us all?
Clearly, it is the global warming alarmists who are in most need of an education in elementary-level atmospheric science.
Ok, sure, I'll help you out here.
Stratospheric ozone blocks UV radiation. This layer of ozone is high up in the stratosphere, which is much higher than the troposphere, where we live. There is a thinning in this ozone layer that we discovered in the 80s that lets in a lot of UV radiation. This thinning is caused by a reaction between ozone and CFCs, which are chemicals that were used in refridgerators, aerosols, etc. Excessive UV radiation can cause skin cancer, cataracts, as well as phytoplankton decline. So naturally, this caused alarm in the 80s!
This is why a group of people got together in Montreal and did something about it. They agreed to reduce CFC usage (fortunately they figured out some alternative chemicals). A few years later, the chemical company DuPont decided to voluntarily reduce CFC usage.
The ozone hole is still there but it is slooowly getting thicker again. In 100 years or so, it should be almost back to 1950 levels.
So the reason you don't hear about the ozone problem anymore is because there was international cooperation to do something about it.
Interestingly,ozone, the same chemical that helps us so much in the stratosphere, is very harmful to us when it forms at ground layer. It tends to form on sunny days in places with a lot of car exhaust, often leading to respiratory problems, asthma, etc. This is why you hear about "bad ozone days" on the weather channel.
Shall we move onto the carbon cycle next or do you have more questions about ozone?
Why would you think an article about cold weather this week has anything to do with long term global average temperatures? I have an answer to that question, but I'm curious as to what you'll say.
Stratospheric ozone blocks UV radiation. This layer of ozone is high up in the stratosphere, which is much higher than the troposphere, where we live.
Just a bit of clarification, the ozone layer is indeed above the troposphere, but at the very bottom of the stratosphere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlenextyear
There is a thinning in this ozone layer that we discovered in the 80s that lets in a lot of UV radiation. This thinning is caused by a reaction between ozone and CFCs, which are chemicals that were used in refridgerators, aerosols, etc. Excessive UV radiation can cause skin cancer, cataracts, as well as phytoplankton decline. So naturally, this caused alarm in the 80s!
Actually, we knew about the damaging effects of greenhouse gases on the ozone layer long before the 1980s. In 1973 NASA used the last Saturn V rocket to put Skylab into orbit. Due to the size of the payload NASA had to keep the rocket burning well into the ionosphere. All the Water Vapor the rocket produced as it went through the ozone layer left a gaping hole that required 24 hours to be repaired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlenextyear
The ozone hole is still there but it is slooowly getting thicker again. In 100 years or so, it should be almost back to 1950 levels.
You are misinformed. There was no thinning of the ozone layer, and the only holes you will find in the ozone layer appear above the poles during the winter months, when the sun does not shine. No sunlight, no ozone.
While polls of scientists actively working in the filed of climate science indicate strong general agreement that the earth is warming and human activity is a significant factor, the internet is buzzing with blog posts that say 31,000 scientists say there is "no convincing evidence" that humans can or will cause "catastrophic" heating of the atmosphere.
Yet 97% of the scientists who are dedicated climatologists say the exact opposite and blame humans for global warming. THEY are threatened by the truth, and seeing their meal tickets evaporate as the earth cools.
Thorne/MetO: Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary
See more at: Climategate 2.0
The entire climategate impetus is to transfer the wealth of western countries to the poorest countries, while the power mongers at the top skim the cream and become incredibly wealthy in the process.
IT'S A SCAM!
I'd also like to add that "you can't keep your plan" and ACA will cost trillions rather than be debt neutral. This is what the truth looks like.
Nice work...From your first link...
But polls show that of scientists working in the field of climate science, and publishing papers on the topic: 97% of the climate scientists surveyed believe “global average temperatures have increased” during the past century; and 97% think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.
All your links are to denialist opinion pieces.....Maybe it's just me, but I'll take the word of scientists that are actually publishing on the subject over denialist bloggers every time.
97% of the climate scientists surveyed believe “global average temperatures have increased” during the past century; and 97% think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.
Since we have been over this before Sanspeur you know as well as I do where that number comes from. matter of fact it's almost word for word from the study. Do you really want to try and defend that number again?
If so what is the number of scientists that are the 97%?
This from the poster that claims removing $5 billion in tax subsidies is going to drive gasoline prices up to $11. LOL.
I said externalities, not subsidies. Keep up, coal industry. Oh wait, never mind. You're stuck using a 19th century fuel, you probably are stuck with a 19th century mindset.
J
You are misinformed. There was no thinning of the ozone layer, and the only holes you will find in the ozone layer appear above the poles during the winter months, when the sun does not shine. No sunlight, no ozone.
Whoa, an ozone depletion denalist. Never saw one in the wild before. That's one more for the life list!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
