Global Warming? are humans to blame?

The climate of the world is like the opinions of humans, ergo:

Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are dead.
Aldous Huxley

 

after careful study I've discovered that humans, reptilians and hoy are responsible

 

war-dd must share the blame for, whatever.

 

are you serious?

war reduces population hence pollution

 

I didn't think Global Warming was going to be an issue since the OZONE layer was going to give out on us all. Sorry my bad.....that was just a whole heap of scientific garble proven wrong. I guess i should be worried about global warming since this is the latest fad...i mean concern for the human race sold to us by the same people who were so right about the ozone.

 

actually they weren't sure what was happening with the Ozone layer and still track it closely today. The hole seems to be directly related to aerosols and since those have diminished the Ozone issue is less of a problem, they do still keep an eye on it though.

AGW theory is accepted by ~97% of climate scientists

ever wonder why

cheers
B

 

How was it proven wrong? Scientists said that ozone depletion was related to human use of CFC's and other substances. Use of those substances waqs curtailed, and ozone depletion has been noticeably reduced.

So I repeat: how were worries about the ozone 'proven wrong'?

 

Firstly, ozone depletion has absolutely nothing to do with global warming.

Secondly, it is virtually impossible to destroy ozone, even if we wanted to, because it is created by solar rays of certain type striking oxygen molecules and IC engines, both of which activities are unceasing.

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7e.html

Ozone is created naturally in the stratosphere by the combining of atomic oxygen (O) with molecular oxygen (O2). This process is activated by sunlight. Ozone is destroyed naturally by the absorption of ultraviolet radiation,


O3 + UV >>> O2 + O
and by the collision of ozone with other atmospheric atoms and molecules.


O3 + O >>> 2O2


O3 + O3 >>> 3O2

 

are we reading the same thread?

 

NO I do not. I have in the past, and I have current family members who's income depends on government grants to fund research. There is only so much available to go around to the different universities and govenment labs and contractors. Unless you have a crisis, you will not get any funding and you are out of work. If humans are not to blame, and there is nothing we can do about it, there is no point in funding the research.

This unfortunately is a fact of scientific research. It is money game.

And it is not true that 97 percent of climate scientists accept AGW, but this might be true of for those who accept government grants to fund their research.

 

wrong on all counts Petros
except maybe the part about your relatives taking grant money

Hoyt
ozone is not a strong bond hoyt, there a lot of things that effect it and a lot of things that are effected by it. Many of those things that effect it are man made pollutants. So with the reduction of some of those pollutants we have resolved the problem to some degree. Its got nothing to do with the natural processes or how they were supposed to work. Its got everything to do with the alterations in the atmospheric chemistry just like in AGW.

its not the enemy
its the environment

cheers
B

 

There we go again, making a flat statement as though it's proven and accepted fact -- when in reality, it's completely untrue.

The detailed mechanism by which the polar ozone holes form is different from that for the mid-latitude thinning, but the most important process in both trends is catalytic destruction of ozone by atomic chlorine and bromine. The main source of these halogen atoms in the stratosphere is photodissociation of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) compounds, commonly called freons, and of bromofluorocarbon compounds known as halons. These compounds are transported into the stratosphere after being emitted at the surface. Both ozone depletion mechanisms strengthened as emissions of CFCs and halons increased.

 

I must strongly disagree with your babble, B. You cannot refute the science that I presented, only try to bury it in your dogma.

It has everything to do with the natural processes.

 

You're killing me. Stop. I'm laughing myself to death. Quit it. Quit it. I'm dying here.

If we TRIED to destroy the ozone layer, we couldn't do it.

 

Chemistry Professor to Student,"Congratulations. You have passed gas!"