{OT} {OT} (too off topic) The Ozone Hole

Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.

Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?

Hmmmmmm.....


[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url]

Hachiroku, 8/23/2006, 9:08:34 AM, <mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>
> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>
> Hmmmmmm.....
>
>
> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]

I will guess that if this ever makes it into the mainstream media it
will be spun by the liberals to show Al Gore's movie somehow repaired
the ozone hole by osmosis.

--
"A zebra does not change its spots." ~ Al Gore

On 23 Aug 2006 13:32:08 GMT, "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Hachiroku, 8/23/2006, 9:08:34 AM, <mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>>
>> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>>
>> Hmmmmmm.....
>>
>>
>> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]
>
>I will guess that if this ever makes it into the mainstream media it
>will be spun by the liberals to show Al Gore's movie somehow repaired
>the ozone hole by osmosis.[/color]

Watch the video....they get a dig in about global warming.

Last I checked it was summer and the sun is a bit hot...


--

Scott in Florida

'The Land of the Free Thanks to the Brave'

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:08:34 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.[/color]

I guess the ban of CFCs worked.

[color=blue]
>
>Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?[/color]


I doubt it. I'm sure he claimed humans weren't responsible for the
hole in the ozone layer and that the problem would go away real soon
now.

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:51:43 GMT, Scott in Florida
<askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>Last I checked it was summer and the sun is a bit hot...[/color]

Yes, you have been acting like someone with sunstroke. :-)

"Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...[color=blue]
> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>
> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>
> Hmmmmmm.....
>
> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]

I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.

In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted would
happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase out
CFCs

Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
post?

Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are making
serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good for
their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses here;
unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then the
Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of opportunity
is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and engineers
than they do.

Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT it
from somebody else?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:01:36 -0500, DH wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
> news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...[color=green]
>> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>>
>> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>>
>> Hmmmmmm.....
>>
>> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]
>
> I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
> chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.[/color]


What, exactly, did I get wrong?
Did you read the link?
[color=blue]
>
> In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted would
> happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase out
> CFCs[/color]

Well, then, they were right! How about that!
[color=blue]
>
> Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
> post?[/color]

Huh?
[color=blue]
>
> Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
> environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are making
> serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
> replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good for
> their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses here;
> unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then the
> Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of opportunity
> is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and engineers
> than they do.[/color]


'Protecting the enviornment' is EXPENSIVE. That is why countries like the
US that are FORCED into making sure their factories and industries run
cleanly and efficiently are getting their ASSES kicked by countries like
China, that DON"T have to meet these same requirements, when the fact is
that China is now surpassing the US as the world's biggest polluter. And
the fact they don't have to meet the same requirements means that rather
than COMPETING in world markets, they can UNDERCUT those markets and flood
the playing field with cheaper goods.

Or, did you miss that?

[color=blue]
>
> Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT it
> from somebody else?[/color]

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:31:43 -0400, Stuart Krivis wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:08:34 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>>'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.[/color]
>
> I guess the ban of CFCs worked.
>
>[color=green]
>>
>>Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?[/color]
>
>
> I doubt it. I'm sure he claimed humans weren't responsible for the
> hole in the ozone layer and that the problem would go away real soon
> now.[/color]


What he did say is the the Earth will repair itself, as it always has.

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:16:19 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>
>'Protecting the enviornment' is EXPENSIVE. That is why countries like the
>US that are FORCED into making sure their factories and industries run
>cleanly and efficiently are getting their ASSES kicked by countries like
>China, that DON"T have to meet these same requirements, when the fact is
>that China is now surpassing the US as the world's biggest polluter. And
>the fact they don't have to meet the same requirements means that rather
>than COMPETING in world markets, they can UNDERCUT those markets and flood
>the playing field with cheaper goods.[/color]

China will have to start making their industries clean and efficient
fairly soon. And we'll be right there to sell them the stuff to make
it possible. (Assuming we start actually planning for the future
instead of cannibalizing the past.)

We will also be independent of the oil barons, while many Asian
countries will be at their mercy. (Assuming we start actually planning
for the future instead of cannibalizing the past.)
[color=blue]
>
>Or, did you miss that?
>[/color]

Did you miss the following sentence? :-)
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>>
>> Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT it
>> from somebody else?[/color][/color]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:17:05 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:31:43 -0400, Stuart Krivis wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:08:34 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>>>'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.[/color]
>>
>> I guess the ban of CFCs worked.
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>>Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?[/color]
>>
>>
>> I doubt it. I'm sure he claimed humans weren't responsible for the
>> hole in the ozone layer and that the problem would go away real soon
>> now.[/color]
>
>
>What he did say is the the Earth will repair itself, as it always has.[/color]

So he was actually in favor of environmental laws like the Montreal
Protocol?

The downward slide of manufacturing in the US began with the creation of the
EPA. ;)


mike hunt


"Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
news:T1mHg.11740$Vo.1572@trndny09...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:01:36 -0500, DH wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
>> news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...[color=darkred]
>>> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>>> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>>>
>>> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>>>
>>> Hmmmmmm.....
>>>
>>> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]
>>
>> I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
>> chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.[/color]
>
>
> What, exactly, did I get wrong?
> Did you read the link?
>[color=green]
>>
>> In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted would
>> happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase out
>> CFCs[/color]
>
> Well, then, they were right! How about that!
>[color=green]
>>
>> Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
>> post?[/color]
>
> Huh?
>[color=green]
>>
>> Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
>> environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are making
>> serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
>> replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good for
>> their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses
>> here;
>> unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then
>> the
>> Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of
>> opportunity
>> is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and
>> engineers
>> than they do.[/color]
>
>
> 'Protecting the enviornment' is EXPENSIVE. That is why countries like the
> US that are FORCED into making sure their factories and industries run
> cleanly and efficiently are getting their ASSES kicked by countries like
> China, that DON"T have to meet these same requirements, when the fact is
> that China is now surpassing the US as the world's biggest polluter. And
> the fact they don't have to meet the same requirements means that rather
> than COMPETING in world markets, they can UNDERCUT those markets and flood
> the playing field with cheaper goods.
>
> Or, did you miss that?
>
>[color=green]
>>
>> Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT
>> it
>> from somebody else?[/color]
>[/color]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:03:49 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:
[color=blue]
> Perhaps you did not follow the science involving natural Ozone, that is
> produce by electrical storms? Further studies showed the FCs never got up
> to the Ozone layer, but were destroyed by the suns rays. Weren't you ever
> curious of the fact that IF FCs were actually causing the so called hole in
> the Ozone layer, why were holes not occurring over the industrialized
> countries but over a pristine area like Antarctica? LOL
>
>
> mike hunt[/color]

C'mon, Mike! Everyone knows, CFCs are heavier than air, so they sink to
the bottom! Geeze!!!

[color=blue]
>
>
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:44edce52$0$8852$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=green]
>> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
>> news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...[color=darkred]
>>> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>>> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>>>
>>> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>>>
>>> Hmmmmmm.....
>>>
>>> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]
>>
>> I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
>> chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.
>>
>> In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted would
>> happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase out
>> CFCs
>>
>> Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
>> post?
>>
>> Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
>> environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are making
>> serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
>> replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good for
>> their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses
>> here;
>> unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then
>> the
>> Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of opportunity
>> is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and
>> engineers
>> than they do.
>>
>> Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT
>> it
>> from somebody else?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]
>>[/color][/color]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:12:56 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:
[color=blue]
> The downward slide of manufacturing in the US began with the creation of the
> EPA. ;)
>
>
> mike hunt[/color]

You said it!

And if EVERYONE had to abide by the same 'rules', we could SELL that
technology. But, like the Chinese, a lot of them don't, according to the
Kyoto agreement...


[color=blue]
>
>
> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
> news:T1mHg.11740$Vo.1572@trndny09...[color=green]
>> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:01:36 -0500, DH wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
>>> news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...
>>>> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>>>> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>>>>
>>>> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>>>>
>>>> Hmmmmmm.....
>>>>
>>>> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url]
>>>
>>> I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
>>> chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.[/color]
>>
>>
>> What, exactly, did I get wrong?
>> Did you read the link?
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted would
>>> happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase out
>>> CFCs[/color]
>>
>> Well, then, they were right! How about that!
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
>>> post?[/color]
>>
>> Huh?
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
>>> environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are making
>>> serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
>>> replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good for
>>> their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses
>>> here;
>>> unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then
>>> the
>>> Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of
>>> opportunity
>>> is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and
>>> engineers
>>> than they do.[/color]
>>
>>
>> 'Protecting the enviornment' is EXPENSIVE. That is why countries like the
>> US that are FORCED into making sure their factories and industries run
>> cleanly and efficiently are getting their ASSES kicked by countries like
>> China, that DON"T have to meet these same requirements, when the fact is
>> that China is now surpassing the US as the world's biggest polluter. And
>> the fact they don't have to meet the same requirements means that rather
>> than COMPETING in world markets, they can UNDERCUT those markets and flood
>> the playing field with cheaper goods.
>>
>> Or, did you miss that?
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT
>>> it
>>> from somebody else?[/color]
>>[/color][/color]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 23:30:19 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:03:49 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Perhaps you did not follow the science involving natural Ozone, that is
>> produce by electrical storms? Further studies showed the FCs never got up
>> to the Ozone layer, but were destroyed by the suns rays. Weren't you ever
>> curious of the fact that IF FCs were actually causing the so called hole in
>> the Ozone layer, why were holes not occurring over the industrialized
>> countries but over a pristine area like Antarctica? LOL
>>
>>
>> mike hunt[/color]
>
>C'mon, Mike! Everyone knows, CFCs are heavier than air, so they sink to
>the bottom! Geeze!!!
>[/color]

Oh?

[url]http://darwin.nap.edu/books/0309067952/html/227.html[/url]

[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>>
>>
>> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
>> news:44edce52$0$8852$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=darkred]
>>> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
>>> news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...
>>>> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
>>>> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
>>>>
>>>> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
>>>>
>>>> Hmmmmmm.....
>>>>
>>>> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url]
>>>
>>> I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
>>> chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.
>>>
>>> In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted would
>>> happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase out
>>> CFCs
>>>
>>> Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
>>> post?
>>>
>>> Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
>>> environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are making
>>> serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
>>> replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good for
>>> their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses
>>> here;
>>> unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then
>>> the
>>> Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of opportunity
>>> is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and
>>> engineers
>>> than they do.
>>>
>>> Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just RENT
>>> it
>>> from somebody else?
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]
>>>[/color][/color][/color]

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:e-2cnd_rycAl-HLZUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> Perhaps you did not follow the science involving natural Ozone, that is
> produce by electrical storms? Further studies showed the FCs never got[/color]
up[color=blue]
> to the Ozone layer, but were destroyed by the suns rays. Weren't you ever
> curious of the fact that IF FCs were actually causing the so called hole[/color]
in[color=blue]
> the Ozone layer, why were holes not occurring over the industrialized
> countries but over a pristine area like Antarctica? LOL
>
>
> mike hunt[/color]

I followed it enough to attend a lecture by the guy who discovered the
source of the problem.
[color=blue]
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:44edce52$0$8852$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=green]
> > "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
> > news:mrYGg.6337$8I1.3759@trndny05...[color=darkred]
> >> Report on the BBC: American scientists report the hole in the ozone is
> >> 'repairing' itself and will most likely be gone within 60 years.
> >>
> >> Seems I heard this a few YEARS ago from Rush Limbaugh, eh?
> >>
> >> Hmmmmmm.....
> >>
> >> [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5276994.stm[/url][/color]
> >
> > I love the way one of you clowns gets something wrong and then the Greek
> > chorus piles on, in an effort to look stupider than the original poster.
> >
> > In any event, this is EXACTLY what atmospheric scientists predicted[/color][/color]
would[color=blue][color=green]
> > happen when the Montreal agreement was signed and we started to phase[/color][/color]
out[color=blue][color=green]
> > CFCs
> >
> > Or are you clowns still into selective reading, even of the articles you
> > post?
> >
> > Further, I don't know what it is with you bozos that "protecting the
> > environment" = "the end of the world." I know some people who are[/color][/color]
making[color=blue][color=green]
> > serious money because of the Montreal agreement; they developed a
> > replacement for Halon. Turned out protecting the environment was good[/color][/color]
for[color=blue][color=green]
> > their business. Getting tough on CO2 would also jumpstart businessses
> > here;
> > unless we just flat-out refuse to invest and develop alternatives. Then
> > the
> > Chinese and Indians will make money on it. See, our window of[/color][/color]
opportunity[color=blue][color=green]
> > is NOW, while we still have more and better trained scientists and
> > engineers
> > than they do.
> >
> > Do you want to OWN the energy technology of the 21st century or just[/color][/color]
RENT[color=blue][color=green]
> > it
> > from somebody else?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]
> >[/color]
>
>[/color]



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]