The ozone hole scare was one of the biggest scams in history, until Y2K happened.

Do you know how Ozone forms? The chemical ozone (O3), which is toxic by the way, forms when sunlight strikes oxygen (02).

Now, as we all know, the ozone hole was over the polar ice cap.

Which part of the earth gets the least amount of sunlight? Well, if you have ever been up North, you know that there are times of the year where the sun never goes down, or never comes up, depending on the time of year. The farther you go north, the less light you get, until you reach a place that is almost perpetually dark.

Now, if the polar caps get MUCH less sunlight than the rest of the earth, obviously there will be less ozone there.

This explains the supposed holes in the ozone. They were ALWAYS there. They will ALWAYS be there. That's just how the earth works. Yet, millions and millions of sheeple bought into the whole Ozone scare, because people are literally too stupid to do any thinking for themselves.

what is a ozone hole?????? never really heard of it

In the 90's, the environmental comminuty was up in arms about a hole in the ozone layer which was supposedly linked to all sorts of health risks. The hole was being caused by green house gasses, areosols, farting cows, and traffic pollution. As a result, there was a huge crackdown on what sort of chemicals we could use, and all sorts of pollution regulations began to be enforced. But the whole thing was nothing more than a corporate scam by rival companies.

Excuse me as I spray aerosol into the air.

Pardon me as I light this pile of used tires of fire....

Any ideas on what is causing New Zealand's increased skin cancer rates?

It's a fact that we get more UV light, but why would we? The main thing affecting how much UV light there is is the ozone layer which reflects it.

Here and here have information on how it works.

And NZ sites such as niwascience and The University of Cantebury Antartic Resources also have information so it isn't some localised myth. There is some science behind it. Apparently ozone thickness has reduced since 1985.

It could be something to do with their diets?? Eh I dunno.

But anyways I was looking through a Sharper Image magazine, and there was one of those 'Ionic Air Purifier' with an 'Ozone collector-grid' Haha.

Sorry, I should have been more specific - melanoma rates

And jeepers! Sometimes it's frightening what people come up with...

For a slightly more academic assessment of the ozone hole, and the skeptical arguments against ozone depletion, you might care to read this, agenda-free, article :-

http://www.wunderground.com/education/ozone_skeptics.asp

Congratulations, Insight. You've won Wannabe's "Make Up Your Own Word" award. Good job. Very nice.

Now, the government is making a killing on refrigerant gas (freon) containing CFC's with taxes and fines and various other means. How come chlorine, which is supposedly very ozone depleting, isn't being "phased out"? Or overly taxed. How come you don't have to have a license to use it? How come it's available to anyone? The taxes and restrictions on certain ozone depleting chemicals is a scam. It's all about the buck.

Doesn't the chlorine come from CFCs which are being controlled/banned?

It is not so amazing that patents on existing or "old" Freon were expiring just as the "ozone hole" was discovered. There is, of course, no such thing as an "ozone hole". Ozone forms in part of the stratosphere due to ultraviolet light striking molecules of oxygen, freeing active atoms of oxygen, which attach themselves to molecules of oxygen, forming ozone (and not in any layer of only ozone, just some ozone molecules among many others. The density of ozone molecules in this part of the stratosphere varies during the year. Sometimes it is greater, sometimes it is less. Ozone blocks certain frequencies of ultraviolet light . . . that is why ozone is not formed at lower altitudes . . . the ozone already formed blocks this ultraviolet light from lower parts of the atmosphere. There is really no "ozone hole". This is a term used to frighten people. When the ozone density gets at its minimum, the additional ultraviolet light getting through, say to Los Angeles is still far less than residents in Denver are exposed to with the greatest density of ozone due to the almost a mile difference in altitude. Absolutely a scam, but great to put research dollars from taxpayers into the hands of scientists, and great for the holders of patents of the new refrigerants. Wannabe, the story given by the "scientists" regarding chlorine is that it has no way to get into the upper atmosphere. Funny thing, ozone is much heavier than air or chlorine. I can't imagine any way it could ever rise to these heights, and to the best of my knowlege, no freon molecule has ever been detected at the altitudes the ozone forms. There is correlation between sunspot activity and the amount of ozone, however.

From this site here


And from the troposphere they diffuse into the stratosphere, where chlorine has been detected.


Yes, I just learned a bit about this from last year's scholarship paper at school. Something like, when sunspot activity increases, the magnetic field of the sun strengthens, letting out less UV light so that, in turn, less ozone is created. And sunspot activity has been increasing since around 1950. But, if we follow that thought, less UV light means that less ozone is necessary. And yet melanoma rates are increasing which means that, while the ozone is decreases, the UV light is either staying the same or increasing and that doesn't add up.

Why is the hole not over the us or something??

How are these "dangerous to ozone" chemicals getting to antarctica anyway?

That is what doesn't add up for me.

CFC's do have chlorine in them. But that's not where chlorine comes from originally.

No, as far as I've learned so far, the 'hole' (which isn't actually a hole, just a thinning of the ozone) is over Antartica but it's spreading north (ie, getting bigger).

They evaporate and then diffuse - they rise into the atmosphere and then are transported by air currents and whatnot south and along the way they are diffused (split into the separate components) it is the separate components that do the damage. CFC as a whole is stable but when it's split up, the components do damage. That quote I posted (it would be really great if you'd read the previous posts ) says that a man named James Lovelock released some contraption that flew south, detecting what was in the toposphere (which is next to the stratosphere) as it went. It found CFCs on a route going from the Northern hemisphere to Antartica.


What chlorine are you referring to? I don't understand. The naturally occuring kind? Apparently the natural stuff doesn't account for the level of damage being done. I can't remember the details but if you want I can find some information and explain it. I can't be bothered right now (because I'm lazy...) and people may even just skip over it so there's little point.

I'll be happy to, though, if you're interested . Or you mean something different altogether?

I would have to agree that the ozone scare was that and that only; a scare. Much like global warming, rather than a warming trend, the ozone "scare" did help all of us cut down on the use of CFC's ( which is a good thing, in my opinion ) and other harmful agents. That's good, I like that. However, blaming the big oil and chemical companies for the warming of the globe seems a bit silly to me. Our planet goes through cycles ( and has been for millions of years ) of warming and cooling. I just can't buy into the notion that the actions of the last 80 years could have that much of an effect on the worlds climate.

Nor do I think that skipping a few days of work to don a pair of sandals and "patchouli rules" tee-shirt will do anything to help our environment. As much as I want to help the cause, seeing people picketing on what should be a work day just makes me want to dump all my paint thinner and used motor oil down the nearest flood drain .
I won't though, I will continue to recycle as I see fit, not use products that are tested on animals and dedicate my free time to worthy causes.

So, do you believe that there's no ozone hole or there is no threat? Or, at least, not as much threat as has been spouted by some sources?

Well Potholer we are the ones who are dealing with the consequences of this thinning of the ozone layer and although in the immediate future it isn`t the end of the world, it still means far more people suffering from skin cancer from the ultraviolet radiation that is getting through.

We must all slip, slop and slap! lol!

the so-called "ozone" crisis is a crock of sh** man new zealand's skin cancer problem is because those stoopid aussie fucks are outside all day with like nothing on (including sunblock) dumbasses (not saying all people from the down under and NZ are dumbfucks but most are)

I'm actually not sure what kind of chlorine is in refrigerant gas, just know that the CFC's contain it. I'm wanting to say it's manufactured. I don't know.

And I do understand about not being bothered to expand your argument as some people just don't listen. Believe me, I do.

Not as much as quoted by some sources, yes.

Haha yeah. Lucky us, eh?


I was wondering the other day what level of sun protection sun blocks have in the States? 15+ is useless here so you need at least 30+. Is it the same there?

No need to swear, at any rate. And yes, a lot of people don't wear sunscreen but it's the same all over the world - people don't listen and just want to tan.


Oh ok. Heh yeah it's quite frustrating.


Some sources go overboard, yes, but there is a threat and it's happening right now. The ozone is being destroyed faster than it can be created. But it's good that you recycle and do your bit.