Time Lapse Ozone Hole Over Antarctica

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10609
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:11 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 5:19 pm » by Cornbread714


Why bother posting scientific evidence?

No one here will believe it anyway. :D
Where's the beer and when do I get paid?
- Jimmy Carl Black (the Indian of the group)

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:43 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 5:22 pm » by Electrobadgr


One thing i have never understood is, that if cfcs caused the hole why is it over antartica where there is no one there? Could it not be something else causing the hole? Also i had heard that the hole had all but repaired itself since cfcs were banned in the 80's, the 2007 model shows otherwise.... This just doesn't add up.
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly. time-y wimey... stuff." - The Doctor

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:43 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 5:27 pm » by Electrobadgr


cornbread714 wrote:Why bother posting scientific evidence?

No one here will believe it anyway. :D


you seem to be under the misguided belief that science is infallible cb, science is in a constant state of flux e.g. One week eating carrots helps prevent cancer, the next carrots cause cancer. I am so sick of these so called scientific studies that contradict themselves week to week.

We have every reason to question science as it is so often misleadinG or just fucking wrong, climategate anyone.....
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly. time-y wimey... stuff." - The Doctor

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10609
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:11 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 5:29 pm » by Cornbread714


I rest my case.

BTW, I didn't say proof, I said evidence.
Where's the beer and when do I get paid?
- Jimmy Carl Black (the Indian of the group)

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:43 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 5:37 pm » by Electrobadgr


You rest your case! Do you think we should always accept scientific findings as fact? "it must be true, a scientist said so" do you know how ridiculous that sounds? One scientist says one thing, another the opposite, which one do you believe corn? Personally, unless science is unanimous then it is not credible to me, even then it should still be questioned if only to verify to yourself its truth.
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly. time-y wimey... stuff." - The Doctor

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:43 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 5:50 pm » by Electrobadgr


Hey slush, wasn't disputing the fact there is a hole. I had read recently there had been substantial improvement since the banning of cfc. Was wondering if there could be other factors at play in its expansion?
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly. time-y wimey... stuff." - The Doctor

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10609
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:11 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 6:02 pm » by Cornbread714


electrobadgr wrote:Hey slush, wasn't disputing the fact there is a hole. I had read recently there had been substantial improvement since the banning of cfc. Was wondering if there could be other factors at play in its expansion?



If you read the article, it points to a leveling off of the rate of expansion since CFCs were banned, which points towards the theory that CFCs were a factor in creating the hole, and that banning them had an effect.

But hey, that's basic science, which apparently you don't have much time for.

I knew someone would come barreling into this thread screaming "climate-gate!", that's why I made my original post.

I'm not a paid-off scientist or an idiot. I've seen what's happening to our planet with my own eyes. I'm just trying to get a grasp of the "truth" without succumbing to political spin from either side of the debate.

And I'm not quite ready to throw out 40 years of credible research by thousands of scientists and my own experience.
Where's the beer and when do I get paid?
- Jimmy Carl Black (the Indian of the group)

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:43 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 6:07 pm » by Electrobadgr


Fair enough corn, my question remains. How do you settle on what scientific theories are valid given the inumerable contradictions that arise so regularly?
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly. time-y wimey... stuff." - The Doctor

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:17 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 6:20 pm » by Nuffrespect


didnt they used to explode nuclear weapons in the sky there?
thought i read about it on a topic here once ut im not sure
Image

Guts are important. Your guts are what digest things. But it is your brains that tell you which things to swallow and which not to swallow.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:43 pm

PostWed Dec 02, 2009 8:21 pm » by Electrobadgr


Couldn't find the exact article i was talking about but gere is a few that verify that the ozone hole is repairing:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1050495.stm


By BBC News Online's Helen Briggs
An international group of scientists is predicting that the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica will shrink and close within 50 years.


Our prediction is that ozone amounts will recover over the next 50 years or so

Professor Alan O'Neill
It says a ban on the chemicals that thin the Earth's protective film of gas is showing signs of success and the ozone layer should soon start to repair itself - as long as countries stick to the ban.

The forecast was made following a conference in Buenos Aires, Argentina, where 300 climate scientists scrutinised new data.

But the experts warn that governments must tackle the wider issue of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, if any real progress on ozone is to be achieved.

Montreal Protocol

The prediction is based on evidence that levels of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the lower atmosphere are falling.

CFCs break down ozone, the three-atomed oxygen molecule, which shields the surface of the planet from harmful rays.

An international ban on CFCs, once widely used in aerosols, has been in place since 1987, when the Montreal Protocol was introduced.

Scientists studied fresh data at the Stratospheric Processes and their Role in Climate (SPARC) Second General Assembly in Buenos Aires.

'Detailed understanding'

Alan O'Neill, chair of the SPARC 2000 Scientific Committee, told BBC News Online: "Scientists have gained a detailed understanding of how man-made substances (containing chlorine and bromine) destroy ozone.

"We can explain why much more ozone is destroyed over the Antarctic than over the Arctic, and why the ozone hole is bigger during some years than during others.

"The biggest ever ozone hole was witnessed over Antarctica in early October 2000.

"But we are now seeing evidence that the international bans or controls on ozone destroying substances are now taking effect: amounts of these substances are, overall, falling in the lower atmosphere and our prediction is that ozone amounts will recover over the next 50 years or so."

Delayed recovery

The recovery was not likely to start for a few years yet, Professor O'Neill said, and it would not happen steadily because of natural fluctuations in weather patterns from one year to the next.

And a cooling of the lower atmosphere due to greenhouse gas emissions could delay the closing of the ozone hole, perhaps by a decade or so.

Commenting on the report, Brian Gardiner, one of the British Antarctic Survey scientists who discovered the Antarctic ozone hole in 1985, said political will was needed to tackle the other huge environmental issues facing the planet.

"The Montreal Protocol is the first international treaty that holds out the promise of solving a global environmental problem before it becomes a disaster," he told BBC News Online.

"We should learn from that and attack the bigger problem of climate change by achieving intergovernmental agreement to limit the burning of fossil fuels before the consequences of that become a disaster."

http://transfigurations.blogspot.com/20 ... epair.html

The 20th century's biggest environmental success may exacerbate the 21st century's biggest environmental crisis
By Stuart Fox
12.01.2009

In 1985, scientists from the British Antarctic Survey found a giant hole in the ozone layer of Earth's atmosphere over the South Pole. This discovery prompted a largely successful international effort to ban CFCs, the chemicals largely responsible for man-made thinning of the ozone layer.

Unfortunately, a new analysis from Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) suggests that stopping ozone depletion may actually increase global warming and speed up sea level rise. This discovery pits two important environmental missions against each other, while highlighting the complexity of our effect on the planet.

SCAR's findings indicate that the extra radiation allowed through the atmosphere by the depleted ozone above Antarctica created wind patterns that cooled the eastern, more densely ice-covered, section of the continent. Those weather patterns partly protected Antarctic ice from the ravages of global warming. the rest image

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s914411.htm

The rate of ozone destruction in the upper atmosphere is slowing, suggesting for the first time the global ban on the production and release of damaging industrial gases is having an effect.

A team led by Professor Michael Newchurch, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, USA, analysed measurements of atmospheric ozone and greenhouse gases taken from three NASA satellites and three international ground stations.

They found that ozone depletion in the upper stratosphere - the layer of the atmosphere between 35 and 45 km above the ground - has been slowing since 1997. Their results are to be published in the Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres.

Ozone is a damaging pollutant near the ground, but in the stratosphere, it shields the Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation from the Sun and cosmic rays from space, all of which can cause skin cancers.

In the 1980s, scientists detected for the first time an ozone hole forming over Antarctica each August, eventually breaking up by December or January. Another hole was discovered over the Arctic - both regions vulnerable to ozone damage.

Scientists eventually showed that chlorine released in the upper atmosphere from chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs - chemicals used as refrigerants and aerosol propellants - were destroying this ozone layer. The three scientists - Mario Molina, F. Sherwood Rowland, and Paul Crutzen - jointly won the 1995 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their finding.

Released into the atmosphere, CFC molecules 'percolate' into the upper atmosphere. As they rise, ultraviolet light breaks them up, releasing chlorine which goes on to break ozone molecules down to its constituent oxygen molecules.

The discovery eventually led to an international ban on CFC-based products, a ban which Newchurch said his findings show is paying off. "We can say that what we're doing is working, and we should continue the ban [on CFCs]," he said. But there is still cause for concern, he added.

Ozone is still being lost from the stratosphere. And the amount of chlorine - the chemical that which does the damage in that layer of the stratosphere - has not yet peaked, though it has slowed down significantly. 

When chlorine levels do peak and then begin to fall, ozone levels should continue to rise, said Newchurch. However, the amount of ozone in the upper stratosphere - where the rate of loss is slowing - is small compared to the total amount of ozone in the stratosphere as a whole.

"We don't see compelling evidence that the destruction of ozone is slowing in the lower stratosphere, where 80% of the protective ozone layer exists," said Newchurch.

In the lower stratosphere, the layer of atmosphere between about 20 and 35 km up, the threat to the ozone layer comes not just from chlorine but also from greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. 

Best known for their warming effect on the lower atmosphere, these greenhouse gases have the reverse effect on the stratosphere, said Newchurch. Here, they radiate heat out to space, cooling the lower stratosphere. 

This cooling changes wind and air mixing patterns in a way that can increase ozone depletion, especially at high latitudes - although the effect tends to be mitigated in part by the fact that cooling slows the rate at which ozone is degraded into oxygen - so cooling has both good and bad effects on ozone depletion.

Unfortunately, it is proving easier to ban aerosols and refrigerants containing CFCs than to impose meaningful greenhouse gas emission restrictions on an energy-hungry world, he commented.

NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, is the U.S. space agency.

--------------

I obviously imagined the "all but repaired" thing but you get the idea:-)

Peace
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly. time-y wimey... stuff." - The Doctor


Next

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook